Glaucoma Board decisions

The Veteran's service-connected disabilities, which include depression, cervical spine strain, traumatic injury to the lumbosacral spine with strain, post-traumatic right supraorbital neuropathy, and visual field defect of the right eye with glaucoma, have been rated based on their individual effects. The combined rating is 80 percent.

The Veteran's appeal was denied for all issues except gout, which received a 20% disability rating. The remaining conditions were either not granted or had their ratings denied.

The Veteran's initial claim for an increased rating for glaucoma of the left eye was denied as his visual acuity did not meet the criteria for a compensable rating under Diagnostic Codes 6061 through 6079, and he failed to report for scheduled VA examinations.

The Veteran's appeal is being remanded due to the need for a video conference hearing before a Veterans Law Judge.

The Board found that the Veteran's arthritis of the left hand and glaucoma of the left eye are not related to his military service or any exposure to ionizing radiation during service. As such, service connection for these conditions was denied.

The Veteran's appeal is being remanded for additional development, including obtaining STRs and SSA records, and for a VA examination to assess the severity of his service-connected hypertension with hypertensive retinopathy.

The Veteran's appeal has been dismissed as he withdrew his appeals for all issues prior to the Board's decision.

The Veteran's current eye disorders, including primary open angle glaucoma and status post cataract removal, are not shown to be causally related to his active service.

The Veteran's service-connected bilateral glaucoma is currently rated at 20 percent, and the Board finds that a higher rating is not warranted based on current visual acuity and field of vision.

The Veteran's claim for service connection for glaucoma was reopened and granted, but he is still denied higher ratings for his service-connected degenerative joint diseases of the feet. The Board found that there is no evidence to support a finding that the Veteran's glaucoma is related to military service.

The Veteran's appeal is being remanded due to procedural issues and the need for additional evidence. The claim will be reconsidered with all new information added to the record, including medical records from October 2006 and May 2008.

The Board has denied the Veteran's claims for service connection for glaucoma and hypertension as there is no competent evidence associating these disabilities to his active military duty.

The veteran withdrew his appeal for service connection for primary open angled glaucoma as secondary to diabetes mellitus.

The Board denied the Veteran's claim for service connection for glaucoma as secondary to his service-connected disabilities, based on medical evidence that did not establish a relationship between the Veteran's glaucoma and his diabetes mellitus or hypertension.

The Board denied the Veteran's claim for service connection for glaucoma, finding no evidence that it was related to her active military service or caused by a service-connected disability.

The Board denied the claims for service connection for gout, bilateral hearing loss, and an eye disorder. The claim to reopen a previously-denied skin disorder was also denied.

The appeal is remanded for additional development, including obtaining outstanding medical records and scheduling the Veteran for a VA examination.

The Board denied service connection for hypertension, diabetes mellitus, a sinus disorder, arthritis of the knees, and glaucoma as they were not shown to have been caused by any incident of service. Additionally, it was determined that kidney failure was not proximately caused by carelessness, negligence, lack of proper skill, error in judgment, or similar instance of fault by VA.

The Veteran's service connection for diabetes mellitus was granted due to presumed exposure to herbicides in Korea.

The Board denied service connection for PTSD as there was no credible supporting evidence of the claimed in-service stressors and a diagnosis based on an independently verifiable in-service stressor was not shown.