Citation Nr: 21001208 Decision Date: 01/07/21 Archive Date: 01/07/21 DOCKET NO. 19-24 011 DATE: January 7, 2021 REMANDED Service connection for a heart condition to include mitral valve prolapse is remanded. REASONS FOR REMAND The Veteran served on active duty from January 1976 to January 2007. In September 2019, the Veteran's appeal was denied by the Board which was then vacated by the Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims (Court). This appeal has now been returned to the Board for compliance with an August 2020 Joint Motion for Remand (JMR). Specifically, the JMR indicated that the November 2017 VA medical opinion was inadequate as it did not contain “sufficient analysis of the relevant facts.” Specifically, the JMR contends that the VA examiner failed to address the Veteran’s in-service complaints of wheezing, shortness of breath, and chest pain dating as far back as August 1997 without attribution to a lung condition. Additionally, the JMR stated the VA examiner also failed to address heart abnormalities noted in service, which included a diagnosis of first degree atrioventricular block in 2003 and 2006. Therefore, a new VA examination pursuant to the JMR is warranted. The matter is REMANDED for the following action: Schedule the Veteran for a VA examination to determine the etiology of his heart condition. The VA examiner should review the Joint Motion for Remand (labeled "CAVC Decision" and dated August 7, 2020) to understand why the November 2017 VA examination and opinion was found to be inadequate. The VA examiner should determine whether it is at least as likely as not (50 percent or greater) that the Veteran's heart condition either began during or was otherwise caused by his military service. Why or why not? In so doing the VA examiner should consider the relevant medical evidence from the Veteran’s military service, to include the in-service complaints of wheezing, shortness of breath, and chest pain dating as far back as August 1997 and the diagnosis of first degree atrioventricular block in 2003 and 2006. MATTHEW W. BLACKWELDER Veterans Law Judge Board of Veterans’ Appeals Attorney for the Board H. Yoo, 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 This decision is not precedential and does not establish VA policies or interpretations of general applicability. 38 C.F.R. § 20.1303.