Citation Nr: 21064895 Decision Date: 10/21/21 Archive Date: 10/21/21 DOCKET NO. 18-14 213A DATE: October 21, 2021 REMANDED Entitlement to service connection for jaw pain (claimed as due to extraction of wisdom teeth) is remanded. REASONS FOR REMAND The Veteran served from August 2010 to February 2011, and from August 2011 to May 2012. In June 2020, the Veteran testified at a videoconference Board hearing before the undersigned Veterans Law Judge. A transcript of the hearing is of record. In March 2021, the Board remanded this issue for further development. Unfortunately, based on the following, another remand is required. Here, the record reflects that there is outstanding development that has yet to be completed. Specifically, there is a pending request for a VA examination and medical opinion with respect to the Veteran's jaw pain claim on appeal. See May 2021 VA Exam Request. As such, prior to adjudication of the issue on appeal, this outstanding development must be completed. When "the remand orders of the Board or this Court are not complied with, the Board itself errs in failing to [e]nsure compliance." Stegall v. Brown, 11 Vet. App. 268, 271 (1998). A remand is required to ensure the pending request for a VA examination and opinion is completed. The matters are REMANDED for the following action: 1. Please ensure that the May 2021 Exam Request for a VA medical examination and opinion is completed, which requests the following from a qualified VA examiner: Whether the Veteran's current jaw condition is at least as likely as not (probability of 50 percent or greater) the result of a disease or injury incurred in or aggravated by service, to include the Veteran's in-service jaw pain and teeth extractions. If the VA examiner finds that there is not a diagnosis related to the Veteran's jaw pain, the VA examiner must address whether (1) the Veteran's current jaw pain is productive of functional impairment; and if so, (2) whether the Veteran's jaw pain that is productive of functional impairment is at least as likely as not (probability of 50 percent or greater) the result of a disease or injury incurred in or aggravated by service, to include the Veteran's in-service jaw pain and teeth extractions. In determining whether the Veteran's jaw pain causes functional impairment, the VA examiner must address whether the Veteran is able to function under the ordinary conditions of daily life, including employment, due to her left shoulder pain, to include during flareups. The examiner should discuss the Veteran's lay statements regarding the history and chronicity of symptomatology, to include the Veteran's ongoing reports of neck problems. S/he should outline that history in the report. The examiner is advised that the Veteran is competent to report his symptoms and history, and such reports must be specifically acknowledged and considered in formulating any opinions. If the examiner rejects the Veteran's reports of symptomatology, a reason for doing so must be provided. The VA examiner is asked to make sure to review and address all that is requested in the May 2021 Exam Request. Any opinion expressed by the VA examiner must "contain not only clear conclusions with supporting data, but also a reasoned medical explanation connecting the two. See Nieves-Rodriguez v. Peake, 22 Vet. App. 295, 301 (2008). 2. THE AOJ MUST REVIEW THE CLAIMS FILE AND ENSURE THAT THE FOREGOING DEVELOPMENT ACTION HAS BEEN COMPLETED IN FULL. IF ANY DEVELOPMENT IS INCOMPLETE, APPROPRIATE CORRECTIVE ACTION MUST BE IMPLEMENTED. IF ANY REPORT DOES NOT INCLUDE ADEQUATE RESPONSES TO THE SPECIFIC OPINIONS REQUESTED, IT MUST BE RETURNED TO THE PROVIDING EXAMINER FOR CORRECTIVE ACTION. YVETTE R. WHITE Veterans Law Judge Board of Veterans' Appeals Attorney for the Board D. Abdelbary, 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.