The Board has determined that the RO did not provide sufficient information about what evidence would be necessary to reopen the veteran's claim for service connection, and thus the case is being remanded for further action.
The deciding factor: The decision was remanded due to insufficient notification of what new and material evidence is required to reopen the veteran's previously denied claims.
- Claimed conditions
- loss of visual acuity, eye injury, retinitis pigmentosa
- How they argued it
- Reopened with new and material evidence
- Exposure basis
- None
- Rating assigned
- None in this decision
- Decision date
- April 14, 2006
- Citation
- 0610743
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 0610743.
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.
- Remanded (sent back)
The Board remands the claim for compensation under 38 U.S.C. § 1151 for an additional disability of loss of visual acuity and a failed corneal transplant, as a result of eye surgeries performed by VA in 2014, due to improper development by the AOJ.
- Granted
The Board granted an earlier effective date of January 3, 2001, for service connection for retinitis pigmentosa based on the re-evaluation of previously unassociated service treatment records.
- Partly granted
The Board granted service connection for lumbar radiculopathy but denied it for genitourinary kidney problem blood in urine, sleep apnea (OSA), cervical radiculopathy neck, and eye injury.
- Denied
The Board denied the Veteran's claim for service connection for loss of visual acuity, finding that the evidence does not support a link between the condition and his military service.
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.