The Board has remanded the case due to inadequate pre-decisional duty to assist errors, specifically regarding the adequacy of a VA opinion and its compliance with the Board's December 2021 remand order.
The deciding factor: The July 2022 examiner did not address the etiology of the Veteran's rashes described in the April 2015 Board hearing, which was a specific directive of the Board's December 2021 remand.
- Claimed conditions
- chloracne of the feet, hands, legs, body
- How they argued it
- Presumptive (no nexus needed)
- Exposure basis
- None
- Rating assigned
- None in this decision
- Decision date
- October 31, 2024
- Citation
- A24070612
Veterans Law Judge
Decisions by this judge: 291 · Granted: 26% (granted or partly granted, in the vetted 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. Look up the original decision on VA.gov (opens in a new tab) using citation A24070612.
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.
- Granted
The Veteran's service-connected disabilities (feet, legs, and back) render him unable to maintain substantially gainful employment, leading to a grant of TDIU.
- Denied
The Board denied the Veteran's claim for service connection for a hips, legs, and toes disorder secondary to her service-connected left sciatic nerve disorder and lumbar spondylosis with multilevel degenerative spondylitic changes due to lack of evidence of an additional disability other than associated with her already service-connected left lower extremity radiculopathy.
- Remanded (sent back)
The Board has decided to remand the case due to lack of substantial compliance with previous remands and failure to obtain necessary medical records. The Veteran's claim for service connection is being returned for further development.
- Denied
The Board denied the Veteran's claims of service connection for joint disabilities and headaches, finding that there was no evidence linking these conditions to his active duty service or any service-connected disability.
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.