Citation Nr: 21067600 Decision Date: 11/04/21 Archive Date: 11/04/21 DOCKET NO. 18-44 649 DATE: November 4, 2021 ORDER Entitlement to service connection for residuals of a traumatic brain injury (TBI) is denied. FINDING OF FACT The Veteran does not have a TBI or any associated residuals. CONCLUSION OF LAW The criteria to establish service connection for residuals of a TBI have not been met. 38 U.S.C. §§ 1110, 5107; 38 C.F.R. §§ 3.102, 3.303. REASONS AND BASES FOR FINDING AND CONCLUSION The Veteran served on active duty from March 1996 to March 2005. This matter comes before the Board of Veterans' Appeals (Board) on appeal from an April 2017 rating decision of the Department of Veterans' Affairs (VA) Regional Office (RO). The Veteran appeared at a teleconference hearing in October 2020 before the undersigned. A transcript of the hearing has been associated with his claims folder. Entitlement to service connection for residuals of a TBI is denied. Establishing service connection generally requires (1) evidence of a current disability; (2) in-service incurrence or aggravation of a disease or injury; and (3) a causal relationship, i.e., a nexus, between the claimed in-service disease or injury and the current disability. Shedden v. Principi, 381 F.3d 1163, 1167 (Fed. Cir. 2004). The Veteran testified at his Board hearing that he was treated at the hospital during service after he was hit in the head while playing football. He reported that he lost consciousness, and he had swelling for approximately two months after the injury, but he did not notice any associated problems or symptoms during service. He indicated that approximately seven years after service, he started having problems with memory loss, hearing voices, and anxiety, which he indicates has been attributed to a diagnosis of paranoid schizophrenia and anxiety. An October 1998 service treatment record (STR) notes that the Veteran was hit over the head by another player's elbow while playing football. He reported that he felt dizzy for a moment at the time of the injury, and he endorsed pain to the right side of his head, but he did not have any loss of consciousness. Subsequent STRs, including his separation examination, are silent for any complaints, treatment, or diagnosis of a head injury or related symptoms, and upon service separation, the Veteran denied any head injury or related symptoms. Post service treatment records reflect that the Veteran received ongoing mental health treatment for symptoms such as auditory hallucinations and anxiety, which were attributed to his diagnosis of schizophrenia. Notably, a May 2014 TBI screening was negative. June 2016 treatment records note that the Veteran had a history of schizophrenia; he recently had an exacerbation in symptoms of auditory hallucinations, anxiety, depression, and paranoia. The Veteran was afforded a VA examination in April 2017. The examination notes that the Veteran reported that, around 2002 or 2003, he was in a flag football game and he was hit around the side of his ear. The Veteran reported that he dropped down immediately and stumbled over to the sideline, losing consciousness for about a minute. The examiner indicated that the Veteran does not have any complaints except for issues focusing and problems with memory. After a review of the Veteran's claims file and an in-person examination, including his reported symptoms, the examiner indicated that there was no objective evidence to render a diagnosis for the claimed TBI. Therefore, the examiner opined that the claimed condition was less likely than not incurred in or caused by the claimed in-service injury, event, or illness. A December 2018 statement from the Veteran's treating physician notes that the Veteran was undergoing treatment for schizophrenia and panic disorder; he had been regularly attending therapy since February 2016. A November 2020 treatment record noted that the Veteran had a history of schizophrenia, paranoid type; it also notes that he denied any head injury. After a review of the evidence, the Board concludes that the Veteran does not have a current diagnosis for a TBI and has not had one at any time during the pendency of the claim or recent to the filing of the claim. Romanowsky v. Shinseki, 26 Vet. App. 289, 294 (2013); McClain v. Nicholson, 21 Vet. App. 319, 321 (2007). Moreover, the competent evidence of record does not establish that the Veteran currently suffers from any residuals related to a head injury. The Board finds that the VA examination, which indicates that the Veteran did not have a diagnosis of TBI incurred in or caused by service or any current symptoms or residuals of a TBI, to be the most probative evidence of record as the VA examiner reviewed the Veteran's medical records, considered the Veteran's lay statements, and conducted an in-person examination of the Veteran in making the determination that the Veteran did not have a TBI or any symptoms or residuals of a head injury, which is consistent with the medical evidence of record. Thus, the competent evidence of record does not establish that the Veteran currently has a TBI or suffers from any residuals related to a head injury. There is no opinion to the contrary. The Board notes that while the Veteran is competent to report observable symptoms, he is not shown to possess the medical training necessary to establish a current disability or render competent opinions about the etiology of a disability. See Davidson v. Shinseki, 581 F.3d 1313 (Fed. Cir. 2009); Jandreau v. Nicholson, 492 F. 3d 1372 (Fed. Cir. 2007); Buchanan v. Nicholson, 451 F. 3d 1331 (Fed. Cir. 2006). Thus, to the extent that the Veteran asserts that he has a TBI or current residuals of a TBI, the Board finds that his statements are outweighed by the remaining evidence of record. Accordingly, the Board finds that the preponderance of the competent and credible evidence is against finding that the Veteran has a TBI or any residuals of a head injury. As there is no disability that can be related to active service, the Veteran's claim for service connection for residuals of a TBI must be denied. 38 U.S.C. § 1110; Gilpin v. West, 155 F.3d 1353 (Fed. Cir. 1998); Brammer v. Derwinski, 3 Vet. App. 223 (1992). Based on the foregoing, the Board finds that the preponderance of the evidence is against the claim for service connection for a TBI. Accordingly, the benefit-of-the-doubt rule does not apply, and the claim is denied. See 38 U.S.C. § 5107(b); 38 C.F.R. §§ 3.102; 4.3; Gilbert v. Derwinski, 1 Vet. App. 49 (1990). Thomas H. O'Shay Veterans Law Judge Board of Veterans' Appeals Attorney for the Board D. Hite, 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.