The Veteran's metastatic melanoma is being remanded for further development due to a failure to reschedule an examination.
The deciding factor: The Board found that the failure to reschedule the Veteran for an examination amounts to a pre-decisional duty-to-assist error, necessitating a new examination.
- Claimed conditions
- metastatic melanoma
- How they argued it
- Direct service connection
- Exposure basis
- None
- Rating assigned
- None in this decision
- Decision date
- October 7, 2020
- Citation
- A20015301
Veterans Law Judge
Decisions by this judge: 2,977 · Granted: 27% (granted or partly granted, in the vetted decisions on this site)
Judge attribution: 2025 complete; earlier years partial.
This is a plain-language summary generated by AI from a public Board of Veterans’ Appeals decision. It can contain errors — always verify against the original. Look up the original decision on VA.gov (opens in a new tab) using citation A20015301.
What this means for you
A remand is not a loss. The Board sent the case back for more development — often a new exam or missing records — before making a final decision. Many remands later end in a grant, and the decision spells out exactly what the Board wanted to see.
What you can do next
Related decisions
Other Board decisions on a similar condition or argued the same way.
- Granted
The Board has granted the Veteran's claim for service connection for metastatic melanoma, finding that it is related to in-service sun exposure.
- Denied
The Veteran's cause of death was not related to his military service, including any in-service dental work or ionizing radiation exposure. The Board denied the claim for service connection.
- Remanded (sent back)
The Board has remanded the case due to a duty to assist error, specifically regarding the relationship between the Veteran's atherosclerotic cerebrovascular accident and his in-service exposure to herbicide agents. The examiner is asked to provide an opinion on whether this condition qualifies as ischemic heart disease for purposes of presumptive service connection.
- Remanded (sent back)
The Veteran's death was attributed to metastatic melanoma, which the Board finds meets the first requirement of service connection. However, due to a pre-decisional duty to assist error, the Board must now obtain medical opinions regarding the nature and etiology of both conditions.
Free starter guide for your own claim
Reading this because you were denied or under-rated? Get the plain-English next steps — your appeal options, the deadline that protects you, and how appeals like yours turn out. One email, no spam.
We will only use this to send the guide. No spam, unsubscribe any time. We never sell your information.
We are not the VA. Veterans’ Rights is an independent resource built for veterans. We are not the U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs, not part of the government, and not endorsed by any government agency.
This is general information, not legal advice. For advice about your own situation, talk to a VA-accredited representative — many help for free.