The Veteran's pigmentary glaucoma is found to have started during service, and the Board granted service connection for this condition.
The deciding factor: The VA clinician explained that the Veteran's pigment dispersion syndrome was subject to a superimposed disease of pigmentary glaucoma in service, which had its onset then.
- Claimed conditions
- pigmentary glaucoma, pigment dispersion syndrome
- How they argued it
- Secondary to another service-connected condition
- Exposure basis
- None
- Rating assigned
- None in this decision
- Decision date
- September 26, 2022
- Citation
- 22054771
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 22054771.
What this means for you
A grant means the Board agreed the veteran was entitled to the benefit. Decisions like this show the kind of evidence and arguments that tend to succeed for claims like it.
What you can do next
Related decisions
Other Board decisions on a similar condition or argued the same way.
- Remanded (sent back)
The Board has determined that the VA medical opinions are inadequate and as such, the RO should have obtained clarifying opinions regarding whether the YAG capsulotomy treatment was in fact conducted too early. The Veteran's claim for compensation under 38 U.S.C. § 1151 is remanded to obtain additional clarification from an appropriate medical professional.
- Remanded (sent back)
The Board has determined that the VA medical opinions are inadequate and as such, the RO should have obtained clarifying opinions regarding whether the YAG capsulotomy treatment was in fact conducted too early. The Veteran's claim for compensation under 38 U.S.C. § 1151 is remanded to obtain additional clarification from an appropriate medical professional.
- Remanded (sent back)
The Board has determined that the VA medical opinions are inadequate and as such, the RO should have obtained clarifying opinions regarding whether the Veteran's left eye condition was caused or aggravated by carelessness, negligence, lack of proper skill, error in judgment, or similar instance of fault on the part of VA. The VA ophthalmologist did not address the private DBQ from 2019 and the timeline provided by the Veteran's treating optometrist.
- Dismissed
The Veteran's appeal for an increased rating for pigmentary glaucoma is dismissed. The claim of entitlement to a TDIU from March 8, 2018 is granted and the claim prior to that date is denied.
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.