The Board denied service connection for all claimed disabilities, finding no evidence of in-service incurrence or association with active service.
The deciding factor: The veteran's available service medical records were lost and do not show any inservice diagnoses or treatment related to the claimed conditions. The evidence does not establish a nexus between any current disability and active service.
- Claimed conditions
- bilateral nuclear sclerotic cataracts, diplopia related to left superior oblique palsy, photophobia, sterility (not demonstrated), eczema, lichens simplex type, tinea cruris and tinea pedis with onychomycosis, skin cancers, actinic keratosis, boils, including carbuncle, furuncle, and chalazion, acne (not demonstrated), extremely dry skin
- How they argued it
- Not specified
- Exposure basis
- None
- Rating assigned
- None in this decision
- Decision date
- August 24, 2007
- Citation
- 0726597
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 0726597.
What this means for you
A denial is a starting point, not the end of the road. You can see why this claim fell short — and, if you are still inside the one-year window, the appeal lanes that may remain open to you.
What you can do next
Related decisions
Other Board decisions on a similar condition or argued the same way.
- Granted
The Board has granted the Veteran's claim for service connection for actinic keratosis, finding that his condition had its onset during active duty and is related to exposure to harmful sun while deployed in Afghanistan.
- Dismissed
The Board has dismissed the Veteran's appeals for service connection of squamous cell carcinoma, basal cell carcinoma, and actinic keratosis as the appeal is considered duplicative of a previous decision.
- Remanded (sent back)
The Veteran's claims for service connection for residuals of a traumatic brain injury, seizure disorder, photophobia, and headaches are being remanded due to the need to obtain Social Security Administration records.
- Remanded (sent back)
The Board has remanded the case due to a duty-to-assist error, specifically failing to obtain an opinion regarding whether the Veteran's current bilateral eye disability is related to service exposure to burn pits. The AOJ should obtain such an opinion.
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.