The Veteran's service connection claim for paralysis of the left ocular muscle is granted. However, his claim for a higher rating for bilateral conjunctivitis remains denied.
The deciding factor: The VA medical examiner could not determine visual acuity due to pain with light exposure, but found no evidence of active conjunctivitis and noted healed scars from prior chemical burns during service.
- Claimed conditions
- Paralysis of the left ocular muscle, Bilateral conjunctivitis
- How they argued it
- Presumptive (no nexus needed)
- Exposure basis
- Burn pits / airborne hazards
- Rating
- Not verified here — check the original decision
- Decision date
- October 20, 2011
- Citation
- 1139075
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. Read the original VA decision (opens in a new tab) using citation 1139075.
What this means for you
A grant means the Board allowed the benefit or issue identified in this decision. Review the original order: other issues in the same appeal may have a different outcome, and this decision does not predict another claim.
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: Remanded (sent back)
The Board has remanded the Veteran's claims for service connection due to inadequate medical opinions and failure to consider all relevant evidence of record.
- Whole decision: Denied
The Board denied the veteran's claims for service connection for prostate cancer and increased ratings for bilateral conjunctivitis, right ear otitis media, allergic rhinitis, and hypertension.
- Whole decision: Remanded (sent back)
The veteran's appeal is being remanded for further development and consideration of his claims, including obtaining additional evidence and providing proper VCAA notice.
- Whole decision: Dismissed
The Veteran's claim for an earlier effective date for diabetes mellitus type II with erectile dysfunction was denied as the evidence did not show that he had been diagnosed and manifested to at least a 10 percent disability rating on or prior to May 8, 2001.
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.