The Board has determined that new and material evidence has been received to reopen the claim of service connection for a bilateral eye disorder, but has not found sufficient evidence to grant an initial rating in excess of 30 percent for PTSD prior to December 27, 2012 or a rating in excess of 50 percent for PTSD beginning on that date.
The deciding factor: The Board found new and material evidence to reopen the claim but did not find sufficient evidence to grant higher ratings for PTSD at any point during the appeal period.
- Claimed conditions
- bilateral eye disorder, refractive error
- How they argued it
- Reopened with new and material evidence
- Exposure basis
- None
- Rating assigned
- None in this decision
- Decision date
- March 5, 2014
- Citation
- 1409356
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 1409356.
What this means for you
A partial grant means some issues were granted while others were denied or remanded — common in multi-issue claims. Look at which issues went which way, and how each was argued.
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 determined that the claims for service connection must be remanded due to inadequate examinations and opinions. The Veteran's skin disorder, respiratory disorder, Crohn's disease, eye disorder, and migraines are all being reviewed again with new medical evaluations.
- Dismissed
The Veteran withdrew his appeals for service connection and rating increases in multiple disabilities, including chronic fatigue syndrome, radiculopathies, refractive error, cervical spine disability, left knee disability, and right knee disability. The Board has dismissed these appeals.
- Remanded (sent back)
The Board has remanded the claims for service connection and compensation under 38 U.S.C. 1151 due to an alleged missing Notice of Disagreement (NOD) filed in January 2016, which was sent in response to a notification letter dated October 2015.
- Remanded (sent back)
The Board has remanded the cases due to inadequate VA examinations and the need for further development. The Veteran's pericardial cyst is being reviewed, as well as his bilateral eye disorder.
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.