The Board denied service connection for Multiple Sclerosis, finding that the Veteran's MS did not manifest to a compensable degree within the applicable presumptive period and continuity of symptomatology was not established. The claim for Malignant Melanoma was also denied as there is no evidence of a causal relationship between the disease and active military service.,The Board found that the Veteran's Multiple Sclerosis was not related to her active duty service, and her Malignant Melanoma was not caused by sun exposure during deployment in Southwest Asia.
The deciding factor: The preponderance of evidence did not establish a link between the Veteran’s Multiple Sclerosis and her active military service. The Board found that there was no clear and unmistakable evidence to show that the disease was aggravated beyond its normal progression by events during her subsequent active duty service.,There is no evidence showing a causal relationship between the Veteran's Malignant Melanoma and sun exposure during deployment in Southwest Asia, as extensive sunbathing outside of a military uniform would have been needed for such a diagnosis.
- Claimed conditions
- Multiple Sclerosis, Malignant Melanoma
- How they argued it
- Direct service connection
- Exposure basis
- None
- Rating
- Not verified here — check the original decision
- Decision date
- April 20, 2020
- Citation
- 20027444
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 20027444.
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 for additional development, including obtaining records of the Appellant's reserve component service and conducting a VA examination to determine if her multiple sclerosis is related to service.
- Whole decision: Remanded (sent back)
The Board has determined that new and relevant evidence has been received to warrant readjudication of the previously denied claims for service connection for Multiple Sclerosis, Hypertension, and Headaches. The case is being remanded to allow for further consideration.
- Whole decision: Denied
The Veteran's right foot AFO brace did not cause wear and tear to her clothing, specifically pants, during the 2022 calendar year. Therefore, she is denied a clothing allowance for that year.
- Whole decision: Remanded (sent back)
The Board has remanded the case due to a duty-to-assist error, specifically regarding private treatment records from June 2015 to October 2017. The Veteran is asked to provide authorization for these records.
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.