The Board found that the Veteran does not have additional disability, including asteroid hyalosis, as a result of right eye cataract surgery in May 1990 at the Salt Lake City VA Medical Center. The claim for compensation under 38 U.S.C.A. § 1151 was denied.
The deciding factor: The Board determined that the Veteran's asteroid hyalosis is not related to the right eye cataract surgery performed in May 1990 at the Salt Lake City VA Medical Center, and thus did not meet the criteria for compensation under 38 U.S.C.A. § 1151.
- Claimed conditions
- asteroid hyalosis
- How they argued it
- Direct service connection
- Exposure basis
- None
- Rating assigned
- None in this decision
- Decision date
- October 30, 2013
- Citation
- 1334630
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 1334630.
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.
- Denied
The Board denied service connection for an eye disorder, finding that the current eye disorders did not begin during or as a result of active service.
- Denied
The Board denied the Veteran's claim of service connection for his vision disorder, finding that there was no evidence to support a link between his current eye conditions and his military service.
- Denied
The Board denied the veteran's claim for service connection and a compensable initial rating for vision loss, finding that his hearing loss disability did not warrant a compensable rating. The issue of service connection for vision loss was remanded to the RO.
- Remanded (sent back)
The veteran is seeking compensation under the provisions of 38 U.S.C.A. § 1151 for asteroid hyalosis, which he claims was caused by cataract surgery performed at a VA facility in May 1990. The case has been remanded to obtain clarification from a medical opinion regarding whether the surgery resulted in additional disability and if so, whether it was due to carelessness or negligence on VA's part.
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.