Citation Nr: 18142529 Decision Date: 10/16/18 Archive Date: 10/16/18 DOCKET NO. 16-33 552 DATE: October 16, 2018 ORDER Entitlement to service connection for a left shoulder disorder is denied. FINDING OF FACT A medical nexus does not exist between an in-service incurrence and a current diagnosis of a left shoulder disorder; a current diagnosis of left shoulder arthritis did not manifest within one year of separation from service, and continuity since separation from service has not been established. CONCLUSION OF LAW The criteria for service connection for a left shoulder disorder have not been met. 38 U.S.C. §§ 1101, 1110, 1112, 1113, 1131, 1137 (2012); 38 C.F.R. §§ 3.303, 3.307, 3.309 (2018). REASONS AND BASES FOR FINDING AND CONCLUSION The Veteran served on active duty from December 1992 to July 1994 and from August 2004 to December 2005. This matter comes to the Board of Veterans’ Appeals (Board) on appeal from a February 2015 rating decision of the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Regional Office (RO) in Houston, Texas. The Veteran was informed of his right to a personal hearing before the Board, but the Veteran declined. The Board notes that the Veteran also perfected an appeal for the denial of service connection for skin neoplasms, but, in February 2017, the RO granted service connection for skin neoplasms. Therefore, the Veteran has already been granted his full prayer of relief, and the Board shall not address this issue any further. Additionally, the Board notes that the Veteran filed a notice of disagreement (NOD) challenging the denial of entitlement to service connection for sleep apnea, and the a statement of the case (SOC) has not been issued in response to the NOD. Nevertheless, the Veterans Appeals Control and Locator System (VACOLS) indicates that VA is aware of the Veteran’s appeal and is developing the Veteran’s claim. Therefore, the Board shall not take limited jurisdiction in order to remand this matter for the issuance of a SOC at this time. Manlincon v. West, 12 Vet. App. 238 (1999). Entitlement to service connection for a left shoulder disorder The Veteran contends that he is entitled to service connection for a left shoulder disorder. The weight of the evidence indicates that the Veteran is not entitled to service connection. In seeking VA disability compensation, a veteran generally seeks to establish that a current disability results from disease or injury incurred in or aggravated by service. 38 U.S.C. §§ 1110, 1131. “Service connection” basically means that the facts, shown by evidence, establish that a particular injury or disease resulting in disability was incurred coincident with service in the Armed Forces, or if preexisting such service, was aggravated therein. 38 C.F.R. § 3.303. Service connection can also be established through application of statutory presumptions, including for chronic diseases like arthritis, when manifested to a compensable degree within one year of separation from service; or when continuity of symptomology since separation of service has been established. 38 C.F.R. §§ 3.307, 3.309. The Veteran’s service treatment records indicate that he sought treatment for shoulder pain in May 1994 and was diagnosed with costochondritis. Upon separation from his first period of service in July 1994, the Veteran’s upper extremities were evaluated as normal, and, in a survey of medical history provided contemporaneously with the Veteran’s separation examination, the Veteran denied having or ever having had a painful or “trick” shoulder. He underwent another military examination in November 2000, and his upper extremities were evaluated as normal. In a survey of medical history provided contemporaneously with the November 2000 examination, the Veteran denied having or ever having had a painful or “trick” shoulder. The Veteran submitted multiple statements indicating that he injured his left shoulder during his first period of service in 1994 and during his second period of service in 2004. He did not seek treatment for a left shoulder disorder until 2011, and continued to manifest left shoulder symptoms thereafter. The Veteran underwent a VA examination in May 2016. He was diagnosed with a strain of the left shoulder. The examiner opined that the Veteran’s left shoulder condition was less likely than not related to a period of service. The examiner indicated that the Veteran’s in-service injuries were acute only, and that there is no evidence of chronicity of care; or evidence to establish a medical nexus. The weight of the evidence indicates that the Veteran is not entitled to service connection for a left shoulder disorder. He has a current diagnosis of a left shoulder disorder. Additionally, the Veteran has provided competent reports that he began to manifest left shoulder problems during his period of service, and service treatment records indicate that the Veteran sought treatment for left shoulder problems during his period of service. Nevertheless, the Veteran did not begin to seek treatment for a left shoulder disorder until years after separation from his second period of service. Additionally, the Veteran was provided a VA examination which indicated a medical nexus had not been established between an in-service incurrence and a current diagnosis. Finally, the record does not contain any opinion establishing that such a nexus exists. Therefore, the weight of the evidence indicates that a medical nexus has not been established between an in-service incurrence and a current diagnosis, and neither a diagnosis or arthritis of the left shoulder within one year of separation from service or continuity of arthritis symptomology since separation from service has been established. Here, the weight of the probative evidence of record simply fails to demonstrate that the Veteran is entitled to service connection for a left shoulder disorder. Therefore, the evidence in this case is not so evenly balanced so as to allow application of the benefit-of-the-doubt rule as required by law and VA regulations. 38 U.S.C. § 5107(b); 38 C.F.R. § 3.102. As such, entitlement to service connection for a left shoulder disorder is denied. BARBARA B. COPELAND Veterans Law Judge Board of Veterans’ Appeals ATTORNEY FOR THE BOARD David R. Seaton, Associate Counsel