The Board has remanded the case due to inadequate medical opinions and a need for further examination. The Veteran's Stargardt disease is being reviewed, but it is not clear if it existed prior to service or was aggravated by service.
The deciding factor: The VA examiner's opinions were found to be inadequate as they did not address the relevant evidence of record, including the Veteran's pre-service glasses use.
- Claimed conditions
- Stargardt disease
- How they argued it
- Direct service connection
- Exposure basis
- None
- Rating
- Not verified here — check the original decision
- Decision date
- March 9, 2026
- Citation
- A26020678
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 A26020678.
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.
- Remanded (sent back)
The Board has found that the August 2021 VA opinion is inadequate and remands the case for an addendum opinion to address the etiology of the Veteran's bilateral eye disorder.
- Granted
The Veteran's earlier effective date for special monthly compensation based on regular aid and attendance/housebound is granted to June 23, 1999, the date VA received notification that he was legally blind.
- Denied
The Board denied the veteran's claims for service connection for Stargardt disease and acoustic neuroma, both of which were not found to be related to herbicide exposure in Vietnam.
- Denied
The Board denied the veteran's claims for increased ratings for his service-connected lumbar myositis, psychoneurosis and conversion hysteria, residuals of shrapnel wounds of the left thigh and pelvis with retained foreign bodies and scars, and residuals of shell fragment wounds of the right thigh and left leg. The veteran was also denied entitlement to a total disability rating based on individual unemployability due to service-connected 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.