The Board has decided to remand the case for a new medical opinion from an ophthalmologist regarding whether the Veteran's left eye blindness is due to VA care, treatment or surgery in October and/or November 2009.
The deciding factor: The decision was made based on the need for a proper medical opinion as the previous one did not address all aspects of the claim, including causation and foreseeability issues.
- Claimed conditions
- left eye blindness
- How they argued it
- Direct service connection
- Exposure basis
- None
- Rating assigned
- None in this decision
- Decision date
- December 12, 2019
- Citation
- 19192822
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 19192822.
What this means for you
A remand is not a loss. The Board sent the case back for more development — often a new exam or missing records — before making a final decision. Many remands later end in a grant, and the decision spells out exactly what the Board wanted to see.
What you can do next
Related decisions
Other Board decisions on a similar condition or argued the same way.
- Denied
The Board denied the Veteran's claim for compensation under 38 U.S.C. § 1151 because the evidence did not show that her left eye blindness was caused by VA care, and instead concluded it was due to her own non-compliance with medical instructions.
- Remanded (sent back)
The Veteran's claim for compensation under 38 U.S.C. § 1151 is remanded due to the need for additional medical opinions regarding the surgeries performed in April 2010 and their impact on his left eye disability.
- Remanded (sent back)
The Board has remanded the claims for service connection for Diabetes Mellitus (Type II) and left eye blindness due to potential direct service connection based on exposure to contaminated water at Camp Lejeune. The Veteran's medical conditions are not entitled to presumptive service connection, but may be related to his service.
- Remanded (sent back)
The Board has remanded the case due to a need for clarification regarding whether the Veteran's left aphakic sensory exotropia, claimed as left eye blindness, clearly and unmistakably pre-existed his active duty service or was directly related to his military service.
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.