The Veteran seeks an earlier effective date for service connection of his epididymitis and also asserts that the October 1971 rating decision contains CUE. The Board has decided to remand these issues.
The deciding factor: The Board found insufficient specificity in the Veteran's contentions regarding CUE in the October 1971 rating decision, leading to a remand for further adjudication by the RO.
- Claimed conditions
- epididymitis
- How they argued it
- Not specified
- Exposure basis
- None
- Rating
- Not verified here — check the original decision
- Decision date
- November 12, 2020
- Citation
- 20072924
Veterans Law Judge
Decisions by this judge: 3,217 · Granted: 46% (granted or partly granted, in the indexed 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. Read the original VA decision (opens in a new tab) using citation 20072924.
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 determined that the Veteran's epididymitis was incurred during service and granted service connection for this condition.
- Whole decision: Granted
The Veteran's effective date for a 40 percent disability rating for service-connected epididymitis, status post right hemiscrotal exploration, is granted as of June 21, 2019.
- Whole decision: Granted
The Veteran's claim for SMC(k) based on loss of use of creative organ is granted effective June 1, 2016. The claim for additional SMC(k) benefits is denied as the Veteran is already in receipt of SMC(k).
- Whole decision: Dismissed
The Veteran's appeal for an effective date prior to December 7, 2015, for the award of service connection for varicocele and epididymitis has been dismissed due to the Veteran's withdrawal request.
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.