The appeal is remanded to the RO for further development of evidence regarding the alleged eye surgeries in April 2002 or May 2002.
The deciding factor: Records from the alleged surgeries are unavailable, and without such records, no compensation can be provided for a disability incurred as a result of that treatment.
- Claimed conditions
- central retinal vein occlusion of the right eye, scar of the right lower eyelid, Bell's palsy with corneal drying
- How they argued it
- Not specified
- Exposure basis
- None
- Rating assigned
- None in this decision
- Decision date
- March 27, 2009
- Citation
- 0911574
Veterans Law Judge
Decisions by this judge: 2,421 · Granted: 29% (granted or partly granted, in the vetted 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. Look up the original decision on VA.gov (opens in a new tab) using citation 0911574.
What this means for you
A remand is not a loss. The Board sent the case back for more development — often a new exam or missing records — before making a final decision. Many remands later end in a grant, and the decision spells out exactly what the Board wanted to see.
What you can do next
Related decisions
Other Board decisions on a similar condition or argued the same way.
- Remanded (sent back)
The Board has remanded the Veteran's claims for service connection for eye disabilities as secondary to his service-connected diabetes mellitus, type II due to insufficient medical opinions and a failure to obtain all relevant records.
- Remanded (sent back)
The Veteran claims compensation under 38 U.S.C.A. § 1151 for central retinal vein occlusion of the right eye, alleging that this condition was caused by a stress test performed at VA's Muskogee VAMC in September 2004 due to his hypertension. The Board has decided to remand the case for further development and consideration.
- Denied
The Veteran's current conditions were not caused by VA medical treatment, and the proximate cause of his additional disability was not an event reasonably foreseeable. Therefore, he is not entitled to compensation under 38 U.S.C.A. § 1151.
- Granted
The Board has determined that the Veteran likely has central retinal vein occlusion of the right eye, which is proximately due to or the result of his service-connected diabetes mellitus.
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.