Citation Nr: 21004462 Decision Date: 01/27/21 Archive Date: 01/27/21 DOCKET NO. 17-02 235 DATE: January 27, 2021 REMANDED Entitlement to an initial disability rating in excess of 30 percent for depressive disorder is remanded. Entitlement to a disability rating in excess of 10 percent for left knee patellofemoral syndrome with osteoarthritis and osteopenia is remanded. Entitlement to a disability rating in excess of 10 percent for right knee patellofemoral syndrome with osteoarthritis and osteopenia prior to June 4, 2019 and a rating in excess of 30 percent as of August 1, 2020 for residuals of right total knee replacement is remanded. Entitlement to an initial disability rating in excess of 10 percent for lumbar strain, degenerative joint disease and degenerative disc disease prior to January 30, 2020 and a rating in excess of 20 percent thereafter is remanded. REASONS FOR REMAND In an April 2019 decision, the Board of Veteran’s Appeals (Board) remanded the Veteran’s claim for increased ratings for his service-connected back disability and right and left knee disabilities for additional development. Those issues have since been returned to the Board for further appellate action. In the April 2019 decision, the Board also denied the Veteran’s claim for a rating in excess of 30 percent for depressive disorder. The Veteran appealed this decision to the Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims (Court). In a September 2020 memorandum decision, the Court set aside the Board decision and remanded the Veteran’s claim. The Board finds that a remand to further develop the record is needed with respect to all four of the issues on appeal. The Veteran’s VA treatment records were last associated with the Veteran’s claims file in October 2016. In its April 2019 decision, the Board noted that the record suggested that the Veteran had continued to receive ongoing treatment at the VA and ordered that all pertinent VA and private medical records identified by the Veteran be obtained. The record reflects that the VA solicited release forms for the Veteran’s private treatment records and obtained and associated those records with the Veteran’s claims file. However, the record does not reflect that any attempt was made to obtain the Veteran’s VA treatment records since October 2016. The Board notes that the Veteran’s VA treatment records may be particularly relevant as the Veteran last underwent a VA mental health examination in September 2016, and a March 2017 letter by the Veteran’s girlfriend noted symptoms not indicated by the September 2016 VA examination, and August 2016 private treatment records note the Veteran to be prescribed Zoloft, which is not indicated in his September 2016 VA examination report. In addition, during the period between the Veteran’s March 2012 and January 2020 VA examinations, the Veteran was diagnosed with additional back disability in 2017 and underwent a right total knee replacement in 2019 with left knee surgery scheduled for the “near future” according to his January 2020 VA examination report. As the record suggests the existence of VA treatment records since October 2016 that may be relevant to the nature and severity of the Veteran’s service-connected psychiatric, back, and knee conditions since that time, the Board finds that a remand is required to obtain those records. The Board also finds that the Veteran should be afforded a new VA mental health examination to assess the current nature and severity of his condition as the evidence suggests his condition may have changed since his most recent September 2016 VA examination. The matters are REMANDED for the following action: 1. Obtain, and associate with the Veteran’s claims file, his VA treatment records since October 2016. 2. Arrange for the Veteran to undergo a new VA mental health examination to assess the current nature and severity of his condition. H. SEESEL Veterans Law Judge Board of Veterans’ Appeals Attorney for the Board A. Christensen 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.