The veteran's glaucoma was not the result of carelessness, negligence, lack of proper skill, error in judgment or similar instance of fault on the part of the VA in furnishing medical treatment; it did not represent an event that was not reasonably foreseeable; and it was not attributable to the VA's failure to diagnose and/or treat a preexisting glaucoma when the VA provided treatment.
The deciding factor: The VHA expert opinion concluded that there was no additional disability or abnormal worsening of the veteran's glaucoma as a result of treatment or lack thereof by VA medical personnel, and that data were missing to make an assessment on whether or not VA medical treatment or lack thereof may have had an abnormal worsening of his glaucoma.
- Claimed conditions
- glaucoma
- How they argued it
- Not specified
- Exposure basis
- None
- Rating assigned
- None in this decision
- Decision date
- April 16, 2008
- Citation
- 0812608
Veterans Law Judge
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. Look up the original decision on VA.gov (opens in a new tab) using citation 0812608.
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.
- Remanded (sent back)
The Veteran's eligibility for PCAFC benefits is remanded due to the AOJ's failure to address whether it is in the best interest of the Veteran to participate in the program. The Board finds that the Veteran has been in need of personal care services for at least six continuous months based on an inability to perform the ADL of bathing.
- Remanded (sent back)
The Veteran's claims for earlier effective dates and increased ratings are being remanded due to the need for further review of the evidence. The Board is unable to determine if there was a factual increase in disability prior to the effective dates requested, or if service connection should be granted based on the current evidence.
- Remanded (sent back)
The Board has remanded the claims for service connection and TDIU due to incomplete records, including SSA disability benefits records. The Veteran's right knee tendinopathy, tendinitis is not rated higher than 10 percent.
- Denied
The Board denied the Veteran's claims for service connection for an acquired psychiatric disorder, including generalized anxiety disorder, and for glaucoma. The evidence did not support a finding of current disability or a link to service.
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.