The Board has remanded the case due to inadequate examination and missing service treatment records. The Veteran's skin condition, claimed as multiple lipomata, is being reviewed for its onset during service or relation to any incident of service.
The deciding factor: The VA examiner failed to address certain lay statements regarding the Veteran's history of tumors on separation examination in 1969 and missing service treatment records from his Vietnam-era service.
- Claimed conditions
- multiple lipomata
- How they argued it
- Direct service connection
- Exposure basis
- None
- Rating assigned
- None in this decision
- Decision date
- October 25, 2022
- Citation
- 22059828
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 22059828.
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.
- Remanded (sent back)
The Veteran's claim for a higher rating for lipomatosis, with multiple lipomata (4 scars on the volar aspect left forearm, left elbow, and left tricep), is being remanded due to inadequate examination findings regarding pain in current lipomas and scars.
- Remanded (sent back)
The Board has remanded the cases of bilateral hearing loss and multiple lipomata due to incomplete records and need for further examination. The Veteran's service connection claims are pending.
- Denied
The Board denied the veteran's claims for service connection for multiple lipomata and tinea pedis, both linked to herbicide exposure. The claim for initial noncompensable rating for tinea cruris/corporis was not addressed in this decision.
- Denied
The Board denied the veteran's claims for increased ratings for his service-connected lumbar myositis, psychoneurosis and conversion hysteria, residuals of shrapnel wounds of the left thigh and pelvis with retained foreign bodies and scars, and residuals of shell fragment wounds of the right thigh and left leg. The veteran was also denied entitlement to a total disability rating based on individual unemployability due to service-connected disabilities.
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.