The veteran is seeking special monthly pension due to blindness and need for aid and attendance. The RO has been notified of the existence of medical evidence pertinent to this claim, but further action is needed as his visual acuity is worsening.
The deciding factor: VA needs to obtain updated eye examination reports from 2004 to determine if the veteran's disability meets the criteria for special monthly pension due to blindness and need for aid and attendance.
- Claimed conditions
- blindness, need for aid and attendance
- How they argued it
- Not specified
- Exposure basis
- None
- Rating
- Not verified here — check the original decision
- Decision date
- May 15, 2006
- Citation
- 0614127
Veterans Law Judge
Decisions by this judge: 1,467 · Granted: 18% (granted or partly granted, in the indexed 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. Search VA.gov for the original decision (opens in a new tab) using citation 0614127.
What this means for you
A remand sends an issue back for more development, often a new examination or missing records. It does not award the benefit or decide the final outcome. The original decision explains the additional work ordered.
What you can do next
Use your own notice and decision stage. A remanded issue is not a final court-appealable denial. VA review guidance and CAVC filing instructions (U.S. federal; reviewed October 7, 2026).
Related decisions
Other Board decisions on a similar condition or argued the same way.
- Whole decision: Remanded (sent back)
The Veteran seeks an earlier effective date for the grant of SMC-T benefits based on a need for aid and attendance. The Board finds that the AOJ committed Clear and Unmistakable Error (CUE) in its December 2019 rating decision, but lacks legal authority to adjudicate CUE motions. Therefore, the claim is remanded for the AOJ to address these issues.
- Whole decision: Denied
The Veteran's service-connected disabilities do not meet the criteria for specially adapted housing or special home adaptation, as they do not qualify for permanent and total disability due to loss of use of extremities or anatomical regions.
- Whole decision: Dismissed
The appeal is dismissed as moot because the Veteran's past due benefits were already awarded and no fees were withheld or paid, so there are no remaining disputes to be adjudicated.
- Whole decision: Denied
The Board denied the veteran's claims for service connection for AVM, blindness (secondary to AVM), and tinnitus due to a lack of evidence showing these conditions occurred during active duty for training.
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.