The Board has decided to remand the case due to the need for a new VA medical opinion regarding the nature and etiology of the Veteran's claimed mercury poisoning/neurological disorder.
The deciding factor: The Board found that additional information is required before deciding the claim, specifically needing an updated medical opinion on the nature and etiology of the Veteran's claimed neurological disorder.
- Claimed conditions
- mercury poisoning, neurological disorders
- How they argued it
- Direct service connection
- Exposure basis
- None
- Rating assigned
- None in this decision
- Decision date
- November 17, 2022
- Citation
- 22064644
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 22064644.
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 service connection for mini strokes/strokes residual, neurological disorders, diabetes, and hypertension as the evidence of record does not support a finding that these conditions are related to the Veteran's active service.
- Denied
The Veteran's claim for earlier effective date prior to November 15, 2021, for DEA benefits was denied as he did not meet the basic eligibility requirements of having a permanent and total service-connected disability prior to that date.
- Remanded (sent back)
The Board has remanded the case for further development, including obtaining updated VA treatment records and scheduling a VA examination to determine the nature and etiology of the Veteran's right foot condition.
- Denied
The Veteran's claim for an earlier effective date for the initial grant of service connection for coronary artery disease (CAD) is denied. The Board found that the September 1997 claim did not reasonably encompass a claim for CAD, and therefore, VA did not receive a valid claim prior to August 31, 2010.
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.