The appeal was remanded to the RO for further development of evidence related to the claim for compensation under 38 U.S.C.A. § 1151 for bilateral eye injury due to VA treatment.
The deciding factor: Further development is needed as the record does not provide sufficient information regarding the nature and extent of any alleged negligence or error in the veteran's care, nor does it establish a clear link between such actions and the claimed injuries.
- Claimed conditions
- bilateral eye injury
- How they argued it
- Not specified
- Exposure basis
- None
- Rating
- Not verified here — check the original decision
- Decision date
- January 2, 2009
- Citation
- 0900044
Veterans Law Judge
Decisions by this judge: 2,776 · Granted: 24% (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 0900044.
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: Dismissed
The appeal for service connection for bilateral eye injury, bilateral plantar fasciitis, and left leg peroneal nerve impingement as secondary to bilateral plantar fasciitis has been withdrawn by the Veteran.
- Whole decision: Dismissed
The Veteran's appeal for TDIU prior to August 21, 2015 is dismissed as the AOJ granted entitlement to TDIU based on psychiatric disability alone with an effective date of August 21, 2015. The issues of service connection for headaches and initial evaluation for bilateral eye injury are remanded.
- Whole decision: Denied
The Board denied service connection for diabetes mellitus, bilateral eye injury, and dental condition due to lack of new and material evidence.,Service connection was also denied for congestive heart failure, hypertension, kidney condition, and acquired psychiatric disorder (MDD and PTSD) as the Veteran's conditions were not related to his military service.
- Whole decision: Remanded (sent back)
The Board has determined that a remand is necessary to obtain updated medical evidence and schedule the appellant for an examination of his bilateral eye disability.
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.