Citation Nr: 18148502 Decision Date: 11/07/18 Archive Date: 11/07/18 DOCKET NO. 05-16 526 DATE: November 7, 2018 REMANDED Entitlement to an initial rating in excess of 10 percent for right knee disability, to include retropatellar pain syndrome (RPPS) is denied. Entitlement to an initial rating in excess of 10 percent for left knee disability, to include retropatellar pain syndrome (RPPS) is denied.   REASONS FOR REMAND The Veteran had active duty for training from April 1987 to August 1987, and had active service from October 1988 to December 1992, and from November 1997 to December 2001. This case initially came to the Board of Veterans’ Appeals (Board) on appeal from December 2002 and December 2003 rating decisions of the. In a February 2009 decision, the Board, in pertinent part, denied increased initial ratings for the Veteran’s knee disabilities. The Veteran appealed the Board’s 2009 decision to the United States Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims (Court). In a joint motion for partial remand (JMR), the Court directed the Board to readjudicate the Veteran’s claim for entitlement to disability evaluations in excess of 10 percent for retropatellar pain syndrome to include consideration of entitlement to separate disability ratings for genu recurvatum under 38 C.F.R. § 4.71a, Diagnostic Code (DC) 5263. In October 2010, April 2012, April 2013, September 2015, and April 2016, and July 2017, the Board remanded the Veteran’s case for further development. 1. Entitlement to an initial rating in excess of 10 percent for right knee disability is remanded. 2. Entitlement to an initial rating in excess of 10 percent for left knee disability is remanded. These issues are again remanded for a new VA examination because the prior examination was not compliant with the Board’s remand directives and is legally inadequate. See Stegall v. West, 11 Vet. App. 268 (1998); see D’Aries v. Peake, 22 Vet. App. 97, 104-05 (2008). The Board in its July 2017 remand directed the RO to schedule the Veteran for a VA examination that, pursuant to Correia v. McDonald, 28 Vet. App. 158 (2016), includes range of motion testing for the bilateral knees in the following areas: active motion, passive motion, weight-bearing, and nonweight-bearing. Upon remand, a VA examination was accomplished in November 2017. With regard to passive range of motion, the VA examiner commented that “[t]here is objective evidence of pain on passive range of motion testing.” The examiner did not provide the degrees of limited motion. With regard to non-weight bearing, the VA examiner commented that “[t]here is objective evidence of pain when the joint is used in non-weight bearing.” Again, the VA examiner did not provide the degrees of limited motion. To be compliant with Correia, it is not enough that an examiner test range of motion for pain on both active and passive motion, in weight-bearing and nonweight-bearing. The VA examiner must also include the results of the range of motion testing. See Correia, 28 Vet. App. at 168. This was not accomplished here, so the VA examination is not compliant with the Board’s remand directives. Similarly, the Veteran complained at the VA examination that he had an aching pain when standing for longer periods. This indicates a functional limitation with repeated use over time. The VA examiner did not provide limitation of motion findings for repeated use over time. Rather, the examiner stated that “[i]t is not possible to determine, without resorting to mere speculation, to estimate loss of range of motion, because there is no conceptual or empirical basis for making such a determination without directly observing function under these conditions.” The VA examiner’s assessment to this extent is legally inadequate because the Court has recognized that it is not impossible to estimate loss of motion under these circumstances. See Sharp v. Shulkin, 29 Vet. App. 26, 34-35 (2017). As such, a new VA examination compliant with Correia and Sharp is needed. The matters are REMANDED for the following action: Schedule the Veteran for an examination of the current severity of his knee disabilities. The examiner must test the Veteran’s active motion, passive motion, and pain with weight-bearing and without weight-bearing. The examiner must also attempt to elicit information regarding the severity, frequency, and duration of any flare-ups and with repeated use over time, and the degree of functional loss during flare-ups and with repeated use over time. To the extent possible, the examiner should identify any symptoms and functional impairments due to the knee disabilities alone and discuss the effect of the Veteran’s disabilities on any occupational functioning and activities of daily living. If it is not possible to provide a specific measurement, or an opinion regarding flare-ups, symptoms, or functional impairment without speculation, the examiner must state whether the need to speculate is due to a deficiency in the state of general medical knowledge (no one could respond given medical science and the known facts), a deficiency in the record (additional facts are required), or the examiner (does not have the knowledge or training). C. BOSELY Acting Veterans Law Judge Board of Veterans’ Appeals ATTORNEY FOR THE BOARD D. Lauritzen, Associate Counsel