The Board denied service connection for right and left eye conditions, finding that the evidence did not demonstrate a nexus between any diagnosed condition and service.
The deciding factor: The VA examiner found it less likely than not that the Veteran's bilateral cataracts or dermatochalasis were incurred in service due to their age-related nature and lack of documented continuity of symptoms post-service.
- Claimed conditions
- dermatochalasis, nuclear cataracts, astigmatism, presbyopia
- How they argued it
- Direct service connection
- Exposure basis
- None
- Rating assigned
- None in this decision
- Decision date
- January 6, 2021
- Citation
- 21001026
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 21001026.
What this means for you
A denial is a starting point, not the end of the road. You can see why this claim fell short — and, if you are still inside the one-year window, the appeal lanes that may remain open to you.
What you can do next
Related decisions
Other Board decisions on a similar condition or argued the same way.
- Dismissed
The Veteran withdrew his appeals for all the listed conditions in April 2024 and March 2025, thus dismissing the appeal.
- Remanded (sent back)
The Board has remanded the case due to insufficient evidence and a need for an addendum opinion regarding the etiology of the Veteran's eye disabilities, including bilateral cataracts, hypertensive retinopathy, hypermetropia, astigmatism, presbyopia, unspecified peripheral retinal degeneration, dry eye syndrome, presence of intraocular lens, old branch retinal vein occlusion, and bilateral pinguecula.
- Remanded (sent back)
The Board has remanded the cases of service connection for left leg scar, right leg scar, and scars on right arm due to a duty to assist error. The Veteran's claims for astigmatism, an acquired psychiatric disorder, and other scars are not granted.
- Remanded (sent back)
The Board has remanded the case due to a duty to assist error and will need to obtain additional private treatment records related to the Veteran's eye disabilities.
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.