The Board has denied the Veteran's claims for service connection for a macular eye hole, a rating in excess of 10 percent for mental health to include sleep dysfunctions (nightmares), and TDIU prior to February 1, 2018. The evidence did not establish that his currently diagnosed conditions were related to or aggravated by service.
The deciding factor: The Veteran's claims were denied as the new evidence received since the November 2016 rating decision was either cumulative or redundant of previous evidence and did not relate to an unestablished fact necessary to substantiate the claim for service connection for age-related macular degeneration. The mental health disorder resulted in occupational and social impairment with mild symptoms, but no significant impairment.
- Claimed conditions
- macular eye hole, age-related macular degeneration
- How they argued it
- Reopened with new and material evidence
- Exposure basis
- None
- Rating
- Not verified here — check the original decision
- Decision date
- June 13, 2019
- Citation
- 19146231
Veterans Law Judge
Decisions by this judge: 1,432 · Granted: 29% (granted or partly granted, in the indexed decisions on this site)
Judge attribution: 2025 complete; earlier years partial.
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 19146231.
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 decided to remand the case due to a duty to assist error, specifically the lack of a medical opinion regarding whether the Veteran's eye disabilities are related to service. The AOJ is required to obtain a VA opinion on this issue.
- Whole decision: Denied
The Board denied service connection for an eye disability, finding that the Veteran's conditions are not related to his in-service incident and that there is no evidence of a nexus between any current eye condition and service.
- Whole decision: Denied
The Board denied the Veteran's claim for service connection for bilateral eye conditions, finding that there is no evidence of an in-service injury or disease related to his current conditions.
- Whole decision: Remanded (sent back)
The Board has reopened the Veteran's claim for service connection for age-related macular degeneration and glaucoma, secondary to his service-connected non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma including chemotherapy treatment. The case is remanded for further development.
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.