Veterans’ RightsAn independent resource for veterans
← All decisions
Remanded (sent back)

The Veteran's claim for an initial rating in excess of 10 percent for liver cirrhosis has been denied.,An effective date of May 10, 2012, but no earlier, for service connection for liver cirrhosis is granted.,The claim for service connection for a lung condition was reopened due to the submission of new evidence that relates to an unestablished fact necessary to grant the Veteran's claim (new diagnosis and exposure history).,Compensation under 38 U.S.C. § 1151 for right eye blindness is denied.,Compensation under 38 U.S.C. § 1151 for left eye blindness is denied.

The deciding factor: The evidence does not support a worsening of the Veteran's right or left eye that was not reasonably foreseeable or caused by carelessness, negligence, lack of proper skill, error in judgment, or similar instance of fault on the part of the VA.,The earliest date on which the record supports that the Veteran had liver cirrhosis is May 10, 2012. The claim for service connection was reopened due to new evidence submitted since the final February 2015 decision.,The criteria for a higher rating (30 percent) are not met as there is no evidence of portal hypertension and splenomegaly in addition to weakness, anorexia, abdominal pain, malaise, and at least minor weight loss.,VA treatment did not cause the Veteran's right or left eye blindness. The Board found that any worsening was not reasonably foreseeable or caused by carelessness, negligence, lack of proper skill, error in judgment, or similar instance of fault on the part of the VA.,The criteria for compensation under 38 U.S.C. § 1151 are not met as there is no evidence showing that the Veteran's right or left eye blindness was caused by carelessness, negligence, lack of proper skill, error in judgment, or similar instance of fault on the part of the VA.

Claimed conditions
liver cirrhosis, lung condition
How they argued it
Not specified
Exposure basis
None
Rating assigned
None in this decision
Decision date
May 28, 2021
Citation
21032870

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 21032870.

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.

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.