The Veteran's appeal for a higher rating for his bilateral eye disability was denied. The issue of entitlement to TDIU has been raised but not adjudicated by the AOJ.
The deciding factor: The Veteran's service-connected disabilities, including his bilateral eye condition, affect his ability to maintain employment.
- Claimed conditions
- Dry Eye Syndrome
- How they argued it
- Direct service connection
- Exposure basis
- None
- Rating
- Not verified here — check the original decision
- Decision date
- February 28, 2018
- Citation
- 1812585
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 1812585.
What this means for you
A final Board denial may be appealed to the U.S. Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims, generally within 120 days of the Board mailing date. A Supplemental Claim with new and relevant evidence is a separate option. Another Higher-Level Review of the Board decision is not available. Check your own notice: this historical decision does not set your deadline.
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 granted an earlier effective date of December 12, 2017 for the award of service connection for dry eye syndrome. The issue of entitlement to an initial compensable rating for dry eye syndrome is remanded.
- Whole decision: Granted
The Veteran is found to be eligible for enrollment in the PCAFC program due to his severe and complex medical conditions, which require personal care services.
- Whole decision: Granted
The Veteran's service-connected dry eye syndrome is manifested by symptoms comparable to a bilateral disorder of the lacrimal apparatus, and his claim for an initial evaluation of 20 percent has been granted.
- Whole decision: Denied
The Veteran's claim for special monthly compensation (SMC) based on the need for regular aid and attendance was denied because he is not in need of such assistance due to his service-connected disabilities. The Board found that while the Veteran requires some help with daily activities, he does not meet the criteria for needing regular aid and attendance.
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.