Glaucoma decisions — 2022

The Board has remanded the Veteran's claims for service connection due to his exposure to herbicide agents in service. The issues include bilateral glaucoma, back disability, peripheral neuropathy of the lower and upper extremities, hypertension, and a stroke.

The Board has remanded the case due to a lack of an examination for service connection of advanced juvenile primary open angle glaucoma. The Veteran is not required to have a new rating assigned, but he needs to be examined to determine if his condition was caused by or aggravated by his military service.

The Veteran's bilateral hearing loss is granted at a 40% disability rating from September 18, 2015. The claim for glaucoma remains pending and remanded.

The Board has remanded the cases of service connection for a heart condition, stomach condition (ulcer), and right eye condition due to lack of evidence of an earlier unadjudicated claim. The Veteran's bilateral hearing loss case is also remanded for additional examination.

The Veteran's claim for service connection for a Traumatic Brain Injury (TBI) is denied. The Board has also remanded the issue of service connection for bilateral glaucoma, as there are insufficient medical opinions in the record to determine if it is related to service or secondary to a service-connected condition.

The Veteran's glaucoma has been productive of both active pathology and loss of visual field, resulting in a 30 percent disability rating.

The Board has granted service connection for Parkinson's disease, but has remanded the issue of service connection for glaucoma due to insufficient medical evidence.

The Veteran's bilateral dry eye syndrome is rated at 20 percent since April 5, 2014. No higher rating is granted as there are no incapacitating episodes or visual impairment due to the condition.

The Board has granted service connection for left eye glaucoma, finding that it is related to the Veteran's in-service trauma and his service-connected chronic bronchitis.

The Veteran's appeal is remanded for further development, including obtaining a VA examination to assess the severity of his service-connected disabilities and verifying his employment history.

The Board has granted service connection for vitreal syneresis with floaters and bilateral cataracts and glaucoma suspect, both on a direct basis. The Veteran's eye disorders are not considered radiogenic diseases.

The Veteran's claim for service connection for chronic allergies has been reopened and granted. The Veteran is now entitled to a compensable rating for conjunctivitis, effective from August 16, 2017. Other issues remain pending.

The Board has granted service connection for tinnitus and a headache disorder, but denied the claims for visual problems including glaucoma and neuralgia. The decision is based on secondary service connection due to a service-connected disability.

The Board has remanded the case for further development and an addendum opinion regarding the Veteran's eye disability, specifically whether it is caused or aggravated by his service-connected diabetes mellitus.

The Veteran's claim for a higher disability rating for bilateral glaucoma is denied as the evidence does not meet the criteria for a higher rating.

The Veteran's bilateral glaucoma and incipient cataracts were rated as 10 percent prior to July 12, 2021, and as 20 percent as of that date. The appeal for higher ratings is denied.,Service connection was denied for skin disabilities of the groin and feet.

The Board denied service connection for sickle cell disease, right eye glaucoma, right hip avascular necrosis, and renal disorder due to lack of evidence showing aggravation during service or any other basis.

The Veteran's service connection claims for diabetes mellitus, type II (DMII), glaucoma, and breast cancer have all been denied by the Board.,There is no direct evidence linking any of these conditions to her military service.

The Board has found the claim of service connection for an eye disability is remanded due to inadequate medical opinion and need for additional evidence.

The Board dismissed the appeal due to the appellant's withdrawal of all issues on appeal.