The Board has remanded the case due to duty-to-assist errors and a need for further examination and opinion regarding the Veteran's service connection claim for residuals of ureteral/bladder cancer, including as related to herbicide exposure.
The deciding factor: The VA physician opinions were inadequate for adjudication purposes and there is a need for a new VA examination and etiological opinion.
- Claimed conditions
- residuals of ureteral/bladder cancer
- How they argued it
- Not specified
- Exposure basis
- Agent Orange / herbicides
- Rating assigned
- None in this decision
- Decision date
- October 3, 2024
- Citation
- A24063172
Veterans Law Judge
Decisions by this judge: 1,614 · Granted: 35% (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 A24063172.
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
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.