The Board remands the claim for service connection for left cheek sebaceous hyperplasia to VA for a new examination, as the previous one did not adequately address all relevant factors.
The deciding factor: The previous VA examiner's opinion was deemed inadequate due to lack of specific analysis regarding the Veteran's unique circumstances and risk factors.
- Claimed conditions
- left cheek sebaceous hyperplasia
- How they argued it
- Direct service connection
- Exposure basis
- Agent Orange / herbicides
- Rating
- Not verified here — check the original decision
- Decision date
- June 20, 2025
- Citation
- 25008194
Veterans Law Judge
Decisions by this judge: 1,242 · Granted: 27% (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 25008194.
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 remanded the Veteran's claims for bilateral nuclear cataract, left cheek sebaceous hyperplasia, and eczema due to potential service connection issues related to sun exposure.
- Whole decision: Remanded (sent back)
The Board has remanded the claims for bilateral nuclear cataract, eczema, psoriasiform dermatitis of the hands, left cheek sebaceous hyperplasia, and right cheek melanoma due to insufficient medical opinions addressing the etiology of these conditions in relation to service and exposure.
- Whole 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.
- Whole decision: Denied
The Board denied the Veteran's claim for an initial evaluation in excess of 10 percent for his service-connected coronary artery disease, finding that the evidence did not support a higher rating based on the severity of his condition.
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.