Paul D. Pietro, Appellant v. Unocal Corporation, Appellee

Summary

The court affirmed the Board's determination that UNOCAL presented substantial evidence rebutting the presumption that Pietro's neuropathy and skin cancer were compensable. It vacated the Board's decisions denying both claims because the Board failed to make sufficiently detailed findings on contested and material issues, including the timing of Pietro's neuropathy, workplace arsenic exposure, the significance of lay testimony, and conflicting medical opinions. The case was remanded for further findings on whether Pietro proved his claims by a preponderance of the evidence.