The Board has decided to remand the case due to unclear diagnoses and need for additional development, including obtaining a clarified medical opinion on whether the Veteran's left eye conditions are related to his service.
The deciding factor: The decision is based on the need for clarification of the Veteran's diagnoses and an updated VA examination to determine if they are related to his service injury.
- Claimed conditions
- localized retinal detachment, scarring, retinal tear, lattice degeneration
- How they argued it
- Direct service connection
- Exposure basis
- None
- Rating
- Not verified here — check the original decision
- Decision date
- August 20, 2019
- Citation
- 19164624
Veterans Law Judge
Decisions by this judge: 1,429 · 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 19164624.
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: Denied
The Veteran's initial ratings for kidney cancer and scarring from treatment have been denied as there is no evidence of compensable residual conditions.
- Whole decision: Remanded (sent back)
The Veteran's claim for a compensable rating for pseudofolliculitis barbae (PFB), including scarring, is remanded due to incomplete examination reports.
- Whole decision: Remanded (sent back)
The Veteran's claim for an initial rating greater than 0 percent for pseudofolliculitis is remanded due to inadequate examination and failure to consider new evidence.
- Whole decision: Denied
The Board denied the Veteran's claim for a compensable rating for a retinal tear as there was no evidence of impaired visual acuity or incapacitating episodes.
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.