The Veteran's claim for a higher rating for his right eye chronic posttraumatic conjunctivitis is being remanded due to the inadequacy of the July 2016 VA examination. The examiner did not address the relationship between the Veteran's service-connected conjunctivitis and his 2013 episode of temporary vision loss, nor did they provide an opinion on any visual field defect.
The deciding factor: The July 2016 VA examination was inadequate as it did not address the relationship between the Veteran's service-connected right eye conjunctivitis and his 2013 episode of temporary vision loss, nor did it provide an opinion on any visual field defect.
- Claimed conditions
- right eye chronic posttraumatic conjunctivitis, amaurosis fugax
- How they argued it
- Direct service connection
- Exposure basis
- None
- Rating assigned
- None in this decision
- Decision date
- December 31, 2019
- Citation
- 19197105
Veterans Law Judge
Decisions by this judge: 2,062 · Granted: 34% (granted or partly granted, in the vetted 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. Look up the original decision on VA.gov (opens in a new tab) using citation 19197105.
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 service connection for a bilateral eye disorder, finding that there is no evidence linking his current conditions to his military service.
- Remanded (sent back)
The Veteran's appeal is being remanded for additional development of his claims, including the submission of updated treatment records and a supplemental statement of the case.
- Denied
The Board found that the Veteran's bilateral eye disorders are not related to his military service and denied his claim.
- Denied
The Board found that the veteran began smoking prior to his active service, and thus cannot establish service connection for disabilities related to tobacco use. The Board denied the claim as there was no evidence linking the current conditions to his active duty.
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.