The Board denied the Veteran's claim for service connection for a heart disability, including coronary artery disease and as due to herbicide exposure. The evidence did not support a finding that his heart condition was related to service or herbicide exposure.
The deciding factor: The VA examiner found no credible medical opinion linking the Veteran’s heart block to herbicide exposure or any other in-service event.
- Claimed conditions
- heart block
- How they argued it
- Direct service connection
- Exposure basis
- None
- Rating
- Not verified here — check the original decision
- Decision date
- April 10, 2020
- Citation
- 20025049
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 20025049.
What this means for you
A final Board denial may be appealed to the U.S. Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims, generally within 120 days of the Board mailing date. A Supplemental Claim with new and relevant evidence is a separate option. Another Higher-Level Review of the Board decision is not available. Check your own notice: this historical decision does not set your deadline.
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: Remanded (sent back)
The Board has decided to remand the case due to insufficient consideration of secondary service connection for coronary artery disease (CAD) related to the Veteran's service-connected foot disability and depression.
- Whole decision: Granted
The Veteran's claim for service connection for CAD, heart block, and coronary artery bypass graft was granted with an effective date of January 9, 1998.
- Whole decision: Remanded (sent back)
The Veteran's appeal is remanded due to the need for a more thorough examination, including METs testing, and consideration of his testimony at the Board hearing.
- Whole decision: Remanded (sent back)
The Board has determined that a remand is necessary to address the etiology of the Veteran's heart disorders, as the VA medical opinion provided was inadequate and did not consider direct service connection or secondary service connection.
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.