The Board has denied the veteran's claims for service connection for myopia and ADHD, finding that there is no evidence of a chronic disability during or since service.
The deciding factor: Service connection cannot be established as myopia is not considered a compensable condition under VA regulations. The claim for ADHD was denied due to lack of medical evidence linking the current diagnosis to service.
- Claimed conditions
- myopia, attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD)
- How they argued it
- Direct service connection
- Exposure basis
- None
- Rating
- Not verified here — check the original decision
- Decision date
- March 5, 2008
- Citation
- 0807577
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 0807577.
What this means for you
A final Board denial may be appealed to the U.S. Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims, generally within 120 days of the Board mailing date. A Supplemental Claim with new and relevant evidence is a separate option. Another Higher-Level Review of the Board decision is not available. Check your own notice: this historical decision does not set your deadline.
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: Dismissed
The Veteran withdrew his appeals for all the listed conditions in April 2024 and March 2025, thus dismissing the appeal.
- Whole decision: Remanded (sent back)
The Board has found that the Appellant's discharge from service is not a bar to VA compensation benefits, but it was an error in fulfilling VA's duty to assist not to obtain a medical opinion addressing the extent of any psychiatric symptoms during service and their effect on the Appellant's behavior. The matter is therefore remanded for further action.
- Whole decision: Denied
The Board found that the Appellant's discharge from service on November 19, 1973, under Other Than Honorable (OTH) conditions was due to unauthorized absence for a continuous period of at least 180 days. This constitutes a regulatory bar to VA compensation and health benefits.
- Whole decision: Remanded (sent back)
The Board has remanded most of the Veteran's claims due to a duty-to-assist error, and will need to obtain additional medical records before readjudicating these cases.
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.