The Veteran seeks service connection for a bilateral eye disability other than glaucoma. The Board has remanded the case due to inadequate examination and conflicting evidence.
The deciding factor: The VA examiner did not consider the private treatment records or the Veteran's competent and credible testimony regarding his in-service symptoms, which could have supported a finding of service connection for blepharoconjunctivitis.
- Claimed conditions
- blepharoconjunctivitis
- How they argued it
- Direct service connection
- Exposure basis
- None
- Rating
- Not verified here — check the original decision
- Decision date
- November 19, 2014
- Citation
- 1451407
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 1451407.
What this means for you
A remand sends an issue back for more development, often a new examination or missing records. It does not award the benefit or decide the final outcome. The original decision explains the additional work ordered.
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 determined that the Veteran's eligibility for PCAFC benefits is in dispute due to a lack of private medical records, and thus the case must be remanded to obtain these records and provide an adequate medical opinion.
- Whole decision: Remanded (sent back)
The Veteran's claims for service connection are remanded due to the need for additional medical opinions regarding the nature and etiology of his claimed disabilities, particularly those related to Reserve service.
- Whole decision: Remanded (sent back)
The Board has remanded the Veteran's claim for service connection for a bilateral eye disorder due to unclear opinions and incomplete records. The Veteran is already service connected for left macular hole repair.
- Whole decision: Denied
The Veteran's eye disorders, including blepharoconjunctivitis and dry eye syndrome, were not caused or aggravated by his period of service. The Board found that the Veteran did not have herbicide exposure and denied service connection based on direct evidence.
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.