The Board denied service connection for pericardial cyst and bilateral eye disorder, other than bilateral dry eye syndrome and macular degeneration due to lack of evidence showing the conditions were incurred or aggravated by military service. The Veteran's pericardial cyst was found not to be aggravated during service, and his bilateral eye disorders are considered age-related.
The deciding factor: The Board determined that there is no clear and unmistakable evidence that the Veteran's pericardial cyst existed prior to service or was aggravated by military service. For the bilateral eye disorder, the VA examiner opined that the conditions were less likely caused by military service due to their age-related nature.
- Claimed conditions
- pericardial cyst, bilateral eye disorder, other than bilateral dry eye syndrome and macular degeneration
- How they argued it
- Direct service connection
- Exposure basis
- None
- Rating
- Not verified here — check the original decision
- Decision date
- January 3, 2025
- Citation
- 25000105
Veterans Law Judge
Decisions by this judge: 2,050 · Granted: 23% (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 25000105.
What this means for you
A final Board denial may be appealed to the U.S. Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims, generally within 120 days of the Board mailing date. A Supplemental Claim with new and relevant evidence is a separate option. Another Higher-Level Review of the Board decision is not available. Check your own notice: this historical decision does not set your deadline.
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 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: Remanded (sent back)
The Board has remanded the claims for service connection due to insufficient medical opinions regarding the Veteran's conditions and their relationship to his military service, specifically herbicide agent exposure.
- Whole decision: Remanded (sent back)
The Board has remanded the claims for service connection for various disabilities, including low white blood cell count, skin, colon polyps, pericardial cyst, prostate and respiratory/lung disabilities, due to a lack of substantial compliance with previous remand instructions. The VA examiners were not provided adequate rationale in their opinions.
- Whole decision: Remanded (sent back)
The Board has remanded the Veteran's claims for service connection due to conflicting opinions in a previous VA examination. The Veteran will need new examinations and records to determine if his disabilities are related to herbicide exposure during service.
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.