The Board remands the claims for further development, including determining whether the Veteran's ship ventured within 12 nautical miles of the Vietnam coast and obtaining additional medical opinions to address the nature and etiology of the claimed conditions.
The deciding factor: Further development is necessary due to a lack of evidence regarding the Veteran's exposure to herbicide agents and inadequate medical opinions.
- Claimed conditions
- Diabetes mellitus type II (DM), Acquired psychiatric disorder, Headaches, Excessive sweating, Frequent urination, Visual impairment
- How they argued it
- Secondary to another service-connected condition
- Exposure basis
- Agent Orange / herbicides
- Rating assigned
- None in this decision
- Decision date
- June 3, 2025
- Citation
- A25049094
Veterans Law Judge
Decisions by this judge: 899 · Granted: 45% (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 A25049094.
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 the Veteran's claims for service connection for a low back disability and an increased rating for his acquired psychiatric disorder. The Board found that there was no evidence linking the current disabilities to military service.
- Remanded (sent back)
The Board has remanded the case for a determination on whether injuries sustained in a November 2001 incident were in the line of duty. The claim for service connection for an acquired psychiatric disorder is also remanded due to its interdependence with the line of duty issue.
- Remanded (sent back)
The Board has denied the Veteran's claims for initial compensable ratings for obstructive sleep apnea and headaches, finding that the evidence does not support a finding of persistent daytime hypersomnolence or other manifestations consistent with a compensable disability rating under the criteria established by Diagnostic Codes. The matter is remanded to obtain additional information from the Veteran regarding his headaches and their impact on his daily life.
- Remanded (sent back)
The Board has remanded the case due to a duty to assist error in failing to obtain private treatment records from the Veteran's treating clinician.
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.