The Board has found that there is a pre-decisional duty to assist error as the Veteran's gynecomastia was not examined or opined upon, and thus remands are required for further examination and opinion.
The deciding factor: There were no VA examinations held regarding the nature and etiology of the Veteran’s claimed disability of gynecomastia.
- Claimed conditions
- gynecomastia
- How they argued it
- Secondary to another service-connected condition
- Exposure basis
- None
- Rating
- Not verified here — check the original decision
- Decision date
- November 12, 2020
- Citation
- A20016812
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. Read the original VA decision (opens in a new tab) using citation A20016812.
What this means for you
A remand sends an issue back for more development, often a new examination or missing records. It does not award the benefit or decide the final outcome. The original decision explains the additional work ordered.
What you can do next
Use your own notice and decision stage. A remanded issue is not a final court-appealable denial. VA review guidance and CAVC filing instructions (U.S. federal; reviewed October 7, 2026).
Related decisions
Other Board decisions on a similar condition or argued the same way.
- Whole decision: Granted
The Board has granted readjudication of the issues of service connection for hypogonadism and gynecomastia due to new evidence received since the last rating decision. The claims of service connection for squamous blepharitis, upper and lower eyelid with dry eye syndrome and pinguecula, left eye, right eye are also remanded.
- Whole decision: Remanded (sent back)
The Board has determined that there was a duty to assist error in the prior decision and has remanded the case for further development regarding whether the Veteran's service-connected back disability caused or aggravated his gynecomastia.
- Whole decision: Remanded (sent back)
The Board has determined that the Veteran's claim should be remanded due to a duty to assist error regarding toxic exposure assessment and for an examination to determine the nature and etiology of his status post-removal gynecomastia and hypertrophy.
- Whole decision: Remanded (sent back)
The Board has denied the Veteran's claims for service connection for back disability, gastrointestinal condition, gynecomastia, kidney lesion, and liver cirrhosis due to lack of evidence linking these conditions to his military service. The case is remanded for further development.
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.