Citation Nr: 20004769 Decision Date: 01/21/20 Archive Date: 01/21/20 DOCKET NO. 14-30 182 DATE: January 21, 2020 ORDER Entitlement to service connection for a left shoulder disability is denied. FINDING OF FACT The preponderance of the evidence is against a finding that the Veteran’s left shoulder disorder is due to or the result of his active service. CONCLUSION OF LAW The criteria for entitlement to service connection for a left shoulder disability have not been met. 38 U.S.C. §§ 1101, 1110, 5103, 5107; 38 C.F.R. §§ 3.102, 3.303. REASONS AND BASES FOR FINDING AND CONCLUSION The Veteran served on active duty from January 1999 to January 2003. This matter was previously remanded by the Board of Veterans’ Appeals (Board) in May 2018. In consideration of the appeal, the Board is satisfied there was substantial compliance with the remand directives and will proceed with review. See, Stegall v. West, 11 Vet. App. 268 (1998). Entitlement to service connection for a left shoulder disability The Veteran contends that service connection for a left shoulder disability is warranted. Service connection may be granted for disability resulting from disease or injury incurred in or aggravated by active service. 38 U.S.C. §§ 1110, 1131, 5107; 38 C.F.R. § 3.303. The three-element test for service connection requires evidence of: (1) a current disability; (2) in-service incurrence or aggravation of a disease or injury; and (3) a causal relationship between the current disability and the in-service disease or injury. Shedden v. Principi, 381 F.3d 1163, 1166 -67 (Fed. Cir. 2004). The Veteran’s treatment records indicate that he had a diagnosis of minor rotator cuff tendinitis in 2014. Additionally, the Veteran has described experiencing pain of his left shoulder which limits his ability to function. As a result, the Veteran has a current left shoulder disability. The Veteran’s service treatment records indicate that he received treatment for a left shoulder injury in September 2002, which may have resulted in the dislocation of his left shoulder. As a result, the second element of service connection has been met. Shedden, supra. The Veteran had an examination for his claimed left shoulder condition in October 2010. The examiner found that x-rays demonstrated that bony structures of left shoulder were within normal limits. The Veteran indicated that he experienced left shoulder pain and stiffness. He also noted that he has flare ups everyone to two months for one to two days. The examiner noted that the Veteran has mild functional impairment, but his left shoulder range of motion was normal. The examiner opined that although the Veteran has a history of a left shoulder injury, he has no residual functional impairment. VA treatment records from May to October 2014 indicate that the Veteran was treated for left shoulder pain. The Veteran was diagnosed with minor rotator cuff tendinitis. There was no evidence of a rotator cuff tear, or acute osseous findings, and his x-rays were normal. The Veteran stated that he injured his shoulder in service and the pain has gotten gradually worse since then. In compliance with the May 2018 Board remand, the Veteran had an examination for his claimed shoulder disability in February 2019. The examiner confirmed that the Veteran was diagnosed with minor rotator cuff tendonitis in 2014. However, the examiner noted that there was found no decreased range of motion or pain at the left shoulder joint, which suggested to the examiner that the 2014 finding in the left shoulder had healed. The examiner opined that the Veteran left shoulder condition was less likely than not related to his in-service left shoulder injury. The examiner noted that the Veteran did not have any complaints to a treating physician until 2014, which was 13 years after separation from service. Additionally, the examiner noted that there was no evidence that the Veteran’s complaints in 2014 were related to his in-service injury. Furthermore, the Veteran’s left shoulder was found to be within normal limits upon examination. The Board finds the February 2019 examiner’s opinion to be highly probative. The February 2019 examiner’s opinion is shown to have been based on a thorough review of the Veteran’s medical record, a thorough examination of the Veteran, and is accompanied by sufficient explanations and reasoning. As the examiner relied on the record, and provided an adequate rationale for his opinion, the Board finds that this opinion is highly probative. Furthermore, there is no medical opinion to the contrary. Additionally, although lay persons are competent to report symptoms or other matters within their personal knowledge, and to provide opinions on some medical matters (see Kahana v. Shinseki, 24 Vet. App. 428, 435 (2011)), here, the specific matters of the diagnosis and etiology of a left shoulder disability are complex medical matters that fall outside the realm of common knowledge of a lay person. See Clayburn v. West, 12 Vet. App. 488, 496-97 (1997) (holding that a veteran is not competent to relate currently diagnosed joint disease to the continuous post-service back injury). In this regard, such an opinion requires specialized medical knowledge. The Veteran is not shown to have the necessary training and expertise to provide a competent opinion as to the causes of a left shoulder disability. In view of the above, the preponderance of the evidence is against the claim for service connection for a left shoulder disability. Accordingly, the claim is denied. Absent a relative balance of the evidence for and against the claims, the evidence is not in equipoise and the benefit of the doubt doctrine does not apply. 38 U.S.C. § 5107(b); Gilbert v. Derwinski, 1 Vet. App. 49 (1990). Bethany L. Buck Veterans Law Judge Board of Veterans’ Appeals Attorney for the Board David M. Sebstead, Associate Counsel The Board’s decision in this case is binding only with respect to the instant matter decided. This decision is not precedential, and does not establish VA policies or interpretations of general applicability. 38 C.F.R. § 20.1303.