Citation Nr: 18115262
Decision Date: 06/29/18	Archive Date: 06/29/18

DOCKET NO. 15-08 354
DATE:	June 29, 2018
ORDER
Entitlement to service connection for a left shoulder disability is granted.
FINDING OF FACT
The Veteran’s left shoulder disability is related to service. 
CONCLUSION OF LAW
The criteria for entitlement to service connection for a left shoulder disability have been met. 38 U.S.C. §§ 1110, 5107(b); 38 C.F.R. §§ 3.102, 3.303(a).
REASONS AND BASES FOR FINDING AND CONCLUSION
The Veteran served on active duty from July 2002 to April 2003 and from August 2008 to October 2009.
This matter arose to the Board of Veterans’ Appeals (Board) from a September 2013 rating decision of the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Regional Office (RO) in New York, New York.
In December 2017, the Veteran underwent a hearing with the below signed Veterans Law Judge (VLJ). A transcript of that hearing is associated with the record.
Entitlement to service connection for a left shoulder disability
(Continued on the next page)
 
The Veteran contends that his left shoulder disability is related to service.  Specifically, he asserts that he struck his left shoulder while participating in Humvee rollover exercises before shipping overseas to Iraq. Once in Baghdad, the Veteran sought treatment for his shoulder, and the treatment is notated in the Veteran’s service treatment records. Ever since the incident, the Veteran explained, he has suffered from pain in his left shoulder. 
On review, the Board concludes that the Veteran has suffered from a left shoulder disability during the pendency of the appeal that is related to or aggravated by service. 38 U.S.C. §§ 1110, 5107(b); Holton v. Shinseki, 557 F.3d 1363, 1366 (Fed. Cir. 2009); 38 C.F.R. § 3.303(a). Current VA medical records show the Veteran has been receiving treatment for left shoulder symptoms, and in September 2013, a VA physician opined that the Veteran’s diagnosed left shoulder disability (tendonitis of the rotator cuff and articular cartilage damage with subsequent degenerative joint disease) is at least as likely as not caused by the Veteran’s reported in-service injury. The Board acknowledges that there is some conflicting medical evidence of record regarding the etiology of the Veteran’s shoulder disability; however, resolving reasonable doubt in his favor, the Board finds that the elements of service connection have been met.
 
LESLEY A. REIN
Veterans Law Judge
Board of Veterans’ Appeals
ATTORNEY FOR THE BOARD	C. Ryan