The Board has found that the VA examination provided in April 2019 was inadequate and remanded for an addendum opinion to address the Veteran's dry eye syndrome, including its relationship to other diagnosed conditions and whether any of these conditions aggravated his dry eye syndrome.
The deciding factor: The VA examiner did not adequately address the causation and aggravation aspects of the Veteran's claim regarding his dry eye syndrome.
- Claimed conditions
- dry eye syndrome, superficial punctate keratitis, primary acquired melanosis
- How they argued it
- Direct service connection
- Exposure basis
- None
- Rating
- Not verified here — check the original decision
- Decision date
- July 29, 2024
- Citation
- A24041612
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 A24041612.
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
Related decisions
Other Board decisions on a similar condition or argued the same way.
- Dismissed
The Board dismissed the appeal of entitlement to service connection for dry eye syndrome claimed as visual impairment, including blurry vision, blindness, double vision due to procedural error. The Veteran's claim for service connection for sleep apnea was denied because there is no evidence of a current diagnosis of sleep apnea.
- Partly granted
The Veteran's claim for an initial compensable rating for OSA is denied as his sleep apnea has not been manifested by persistent daytime hypersomnolence or required use of a breathing assistance device such as a CPAP machine.,The Veteran's claims for service connection for dry eye syndrome and an increased rating for left knee disability are remanded due to procedural errors in the adjudication process.
- Remanded (sent back)
The Board has decided to remand the case due to insufficient evidence regarding the etiology of the Veteran's dry eye syndrome and conjunctivitis, including any potential service connection or toxic exposure.
- Remanded (sent back)
The Board has decided to remand the case due to duty-to-assist errors, including failing to obtain SSA records and VA medical opinions regarding whether the Veteran's left eye disability is secondary to his service-connected hypertension.
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.