The Veteran's claim for service connection for an eye disability, specifically allergic conjunctivitis and primary open angle glaucoma, is being remanded due to the need for additional development including a new examination.
The deciding factor: Additional medical evidence and opinion are required to determine if the Veteran's current conditions are related to his military service or ADT in July 1988.
- Claimed conditions
- allergic conjunctivitis, primary open angle glaucoma
- How they argued it
- Direct service connection
- Exposure basis
- None
- Rating assigned
- None in this decision
- Decision date
- December 21, 2011
- Citation
- 1146640
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 1146640.
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 found that service connection for primary open angle glaucoma and chronic sinusitis is granted, but the claim of service connection for obstructive sleep apnea secondary to PTSD is remanded due to a duty-to-assist error.
- Remanded (sent back)
The Board has found that the Veteran's eye disabilities are related to service, but requires further examination and opinion regarding the etiology of these conditions.
- Denied
The Veteran's claim for service connection for bilateral hearing loss is denied as he does not have a current disability of hearing loss for VA purposes.,The Veteran's claim for a compensable initial rating for allergic conjunctivitis is denied due to inactive conjunctivitis with no evidence of impairment or disfigurement.
- Remanded (sent back)
The Board has remanded the case due to insufficient medical opinions regarding the nature and etiology of the appellant's bilateral eye disability, including her current diagnoses and their connection 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.