Citation Nr: 21061738 Decision Date: 10/05/21 Archive Date: 10/05/21 DOCKET NO. 16-20 767 DATE: October 5, 2021 REMANDED Entitlement to a rating in excess of 20 percent for osteoarthritis status post-meniscus tear repair of the left knee prior to January 27, 2015, is remanded. REASONS FOR REMAND The Veteran served on active duty from October 1960 to October 1988. This matter comes before the Board of Veterans' Appeals (Board) on appeal from a September 2013 rating decision by the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Regional Office (RO). The Board issued a decision in August 2020, in part, denying entitlement to a rating in excess of 20 percent for osteoarthritis status post-meniscus tear repair of the left knee prior to January 27, 2015. The Veteran appealed the Board's decision to the United States Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims (the Court). In a June 2021 Order, pursuant to a Joint Motion for Remand (JMR), the Court vacated the Board's August 2020 decision in part and remanded the remaining claim to the Board for additional development and readjudication. Entitlement to a rating in excess of 20 percent for osteoarthritis status post-meniscus tear repair of the left knee prior to January 27, 2015, is remanded. Upon review of the record, the Board has determined that further development is necessary prior to adjudication by the Board in light of the Court's June 2021 Order. The Veteran underwent VA examinations for his left knee disability in July 2013 and January 2015. The JMR deemed the Veteran's July 2013 VA examination inadequate because if did not comply with the requirements of Correia v. McDonald, 28 Vet. App. 158, 169-70 (2016). The JMR instructed that a medical opinion be obtained to determine the Veteran's pain on motion prior to January 2015, in compliance with Correia. Therefore, a remand is necessary to obtain a retrospective opinion related to the severity of the Veteran's left knee disability prior to January 27, 2015. See Chotta v. Peake, 22 Vet. App. 80 (2008) (noting that when there is an absence of medical evidence during a certain period of time, a retroactive medical evaluation may be warranted). The matters are REMANDED for the following actions: 1. Obtain and associate with the claims file VA treatment records from November 2004. 2. Send the claims file to an appropriate VA examiner and ask the examiner to review the record and prepare a medical opinion on the nature and severity of the left knee disability. After review of the claims file, the examiner is asked to provide a retrospective opinion and comment as to whether the Veteran's active motion, passive motion, and pain with weight-bearing and without weight-bearing and the severity, frequency, and duration of any flare-ups, and the degree of functional loss during flare-ups can be estimated for the period prior to January 27, 2015. The examiner should describe the additional loss in degrees, if possible. If it is not possible to provide such an estimate, or an opinion regarding flare-ups, symptoms, or functional impairment 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). A complete rationale for all opinions must be provided. If the clinician cannot provide a requested opinion without resorting to speculation, it must be so stated, and the clinician must provide the reasons why an opinion would require speculation. The clinician must indicate whether there was any further need for information or testing necessary to make a determination. Additionally, the clinician must indicate whether any opinion could not be rendered due to limitations of knowledge in the medical community at large and not those of the particular examiner. H. SEESEL Veterans Law Judge Board of Veterans' Appeals Attorney for the Board S. Patel, 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.