The Board has remanded the case due to inadequate medical opinions regarding the etiology of the Veteran's vitiligo, which is currently considered a direct service connection issue without any presumption or secondary theory.
The deciding factor: The examination did not adequately consider the Veteran's lay statements and environmental exposure during ACDUTRA periods in the desert.
- Claimed conditions
- vitiligo
- How they argued it
- Direct service connection
- Exposure basis
- None
- Rating
- Not verified here — check the original decision
- Decision date
- February 2, 2023
- Citation
- 23006595
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 23006595.
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: Remanded (sent back)
The Board has decided to remand the cases of service connection for vitiligo and obstructive sleep apnea due to inadequate VA examinations. The Veteran will need new VA examinations to address these issues.
- Whole decision: Granted
The Board has granted service connection for vitiligo, finding that the Veteran's current condition started during his active duty service and had continuity to the present. The decision is based on the Veteran's lay statements and VA treatment records.
- Whole decision: Remanded (sent back)
The Board has decided to remand the issues of service connection for various cancers and related conditions due to errors in obtaining relevant medical records and inadequate opinions regarding their etiology.
- Whole decision: Remanded (sent back)
The Board has decided to remand the case due to a duty-to-assist error, requiring an additional medical opinion on the etiology of the Veteran's vitiligo.
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.