The Board has remanded the case due to insufficient evidence regarding the presence and etiology of a current bilateral eye disorder. Additional development is needed.
The deciding factor: The June 2015 VA opinion was deemed inadequate as it did not clearly establish whether the Veteran had a current bilateral eye disorder and its relationship to service.
- Claimed conditions
- bilateral eye disorder
- How they argued it
- Direct service connection
- Exposure basis
- None
- Rating
- Not verified here — check the original decision
- Decision date
- October 22, 2020
- Citation
- 20068478
Veterans Law Judge
Decisions by this judge: 1,676 · Granted: 24% (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 20068478.
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: Remanded (sent back)
The Board has determined that the claims for service connection must be remanded due to inadequate examinations and opinions. The Veteran's skin disorder, respiratory disorder, Crohn's disease, eye disorder, and migraines are all being reviewed again with new medical evaluations.
- Whole decision: Remanded (sent back)
The Board has remanded the cases due to inadequate VA examinations and the need for further development. The Veteran's pericardial cyst is being reviewed, as well as his bilateral eye disorder.
- Whole decision: Granted
The Board has granted service connection for the Veteran's bilateral eye disorder, but denied service connection for his CAD and DM II. The bilateral eye disorder is related to exposure to ionizing radiation in service. However, there is no evidence linking CAD and DM II to service or to the Veteran's service-connected TBI.
- Whole decision: Denied
The Board denied service connection for bilateral eye disorder, to include as a manifestation of an intracranial vessel disorder, finding that the Veteran's current condition did not have its onset in service and was not due to any in-service event, injury, or disease.
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.