The Board has decided to remand the case due to insufficient opportunity for a VA examination and failure to attend one, as well as issues related to service connection for prostate cancer. The Veteran's claim must be remanded for necessary development, including a VA examination.
The deciding factor: There was insufficient time between scheduling of the VA examination and its return to the Board, leading to potential failure to comply with remand orders.
- Claimed conditions
- benign neoplasm of the prostate
- How they argued it
- Direct service connection
- Exposure basis
- None
- Rating assigned
- None in this decision
- Decision date
- October 20, 2020
- Citation
- 20067745
Veterans Law Judge
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 20067745.
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.
- Denied
The Board denied the Veteran's claim for an effective date prior to March 28, 2017, for the award of special monthly pension (SMP) based on the need for aid and attendance. The evidence did not show that the Veteran met all eligibility criteria for a retroactive payment of NSP or SMP benefits as of September 17, 2001, due to lack of evidence showing he was disabled in any way prior to March 28, 2017.
- Remanded (sent back)
The Board has remanded the Veteran's claims for service connection due to insufficient evidence and procedural issues.
- Remanded (sent back)
The Board has remanded the case due to a need for clarification on whether the Veteran's diagnosed benign neoplasm of the prostate constitutes a separate claim from his previous denial of service connection for prostate cancer.
- Denied
The Board found no evidence of a link between the Veteran's current genitourinary disorders and his service, including any in-service injuries. The Veteran's lay assertions regarding continuity of symptoms were not credible due to inconsistent statements documented in the medical 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.