Citation Nr: 21003919 Decision Date: 01/25/21 Archive Date: 01/25/21 DOCKET NO. 11-19 385 DATE: January 25, 2021 REMANDED Entitlement to a rating in excess of 20 percent, from March 23, 2016, for a right shoulder disability, is remanded. REASONS FOR REMAND The Veteran served on active duty in the United States Army from March 1978 to January 1991. This matter comes to the Board of Veterans Appeals (Board) from a July 2012 rating decision of the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Regional Office (RO). The issue of entitlement to service connection for a rating in excess of 20 percent for a right shoulder disability was previously before the Board and was denied in July 2019. The Veteran appeals the Board decision to the United States Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims (the Court). In August 2020, the Court granted a Joint Partial Motion for Remand (JPMR), regarding the Veteran’s entitlement to a rating in excess of 20 percent after March 23, 2016, for a new examination that complies with the requirements of Sharp v. Shulkin, 28 Vet. App. 26, 34-35 (2017) and Correia v. McDonald, 28 Vet. App. 158 (2016). The July 2019 Board decision was partially vacated, and the claim remanded. Pursuant to the August 2020 JPMR, the Board finds that remand is warranted for a new examination. The examiner should, to the extent possible, describe the Veteran’s additional functional loss during flare-ups, and conduct testing for pain on both active and passive motion and on weight-bearing and non-weight-bearing. See Sharp v. Shulkin, 29 Vet. App. 26 (2017); Correia v. McDonald, 28 Vet. App. 158 (2016). Any outstanding VA treatment records should be obtained and associated with the claims file. The matters are REMANDED for the following action: 1. Obtain any outstanding treatment records relating to the claim and associate them with the claims file. 2. Thereafter, schedule the Veteran for a new VA examination (or a telehealth interview, a review of the record, or other appropriate substitute for an in-person examination, if deemed sufficient in the event that an in-person examination is not feasible) to determine the current severity of his right shoulder disability. The examiner must test the Veteran’s active motion, passive motion, and pain with weight-bearing and without weight-bearing. See Correia, 28 Vet. App. at 168. The examiner must attempt to elicit information regarding the severity, frequency, and duration of any flare-ups, and the degree of functional loss during flare-ups. See Sharp, 29 Vet. App. at 34-35. If it is not possible to provide a specific measurement based on direct observation, the examiner should provide an estimate, if possible, of the additional impairment due to flare-ups based on the other evidence of record and the Veteran’s statements. The examiner should describe the additional loss, to include in degrees, if possible, or sufficiently explain why any additional functional loss cannot be described or quantified. If it is not possible to provide a specific measurement 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). K. J. ALIBRANDO Veterans Law Judge Board of Veterans’ Appeals Attorney for the Board K. McKenzie, 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.