Citation Nr: 21069587 Decision Date: 11/18/21 Archive Date: 11/18/21 DOCKET NO. 09-46 946 DATE: November 18, 2021 ORDER Entitlement to service connection for upper extremity nerve damage is denied. FINDING OF FACT The most probative evidence does not reach the level of equipoise as to whether the Veteran has upper extremity nerve damage that had its onset during or is etiologically related to active military service. CONCLUSION OF LAW The criteria for entitlement to service connection for upper extremity nerve damage 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 in the United States Army from November 1988 to October 1992. This matter comes before the Board of Veterans' Appeals (Board) on appeal of a decision issued by the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA). The Veteran testified before the undersigned Veterans Law Judge during a hearing in January 2018. A transcript of the hearing is associated with the claims file. In November 2020, the Board remanded claims of service connection for a back disorder and upper extremity nerve damage. The agency of original jurisdiction (AOJ) was asked to attempt to obtain outstanding military personnel and treatment records, and to procure a VA examination addressing lay evidence provided by the Veteran. The AOJ procured all available outstanding medical and personnel records in February 2021. The Veteran attended a VA examination in May 2021. After reviewing the record, the Board finds that the AOJ has substantially complied with the prior remand directives. The AOJ granted service connection for a back disorder. See Rating Decision Narrative, May 2021. This is considered a grant of the maximum benefit allowed by law and the matter is no longer within the Board's jurisdiction. AB v. Brown, 6 Vet. App. 35 (1993). Legal Criteria Service Connection Service connection may be granted for a disability resulting from disease or injury incurred coincident with or aggravated by service. 38 U.S.C. §§ 1110, 1131; 38 C.F.R. § 3.303(a). Establishing direct service connection generally requires competent evidence of: (1) 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 existence of a current disability is the cornerstone of a VA compensation claim. See Degmetich v. Brown, 104 F.3d 1328, 1332 (1997). In the absence of proof of a present disability, there can be no valid claim. Brammer v. Derwinski, 3 Vet. App. 223, 225 (1992). 1. Entitlement to service connection for upper extremity nerve damage The Board finds that the most probative evidence does not reach the level of equipoise in the claim of entitlement to service connection for upper extremity nerve damage. Therefore, the claim must be denied. After careful review of the record, the Board finds that the evidence does not support the existence of a current upper extremity nerve damage disorder during the appeal period. VA examinations in December 2012, December 2019, and May 2021 found no pathology of the upper extremity nerves. The VA examiner in December 2019 noted that the Veteran had a stroke in 2017, and concluded that "there is no upper extremity neurological damage. He has left-sided hemiplegia from a 2017 cerebrovascular accident." The Board notes that the Veteran was denied service connection for residuals of a stroke in May 2018, and did not file a timely appeal or submit new and material evidence within one year of that decision. See 38 U.S.C. § 7105; Rating Decision Narrative, May 2018. Review of VA and private medical records does not show any diagnosis of nerve damage during the rating period. Accordingly, a current disability is not established, and the claim must be denied. See Brammer, 3 Vet. App. at 225. The lay evidence of record has been considered. However, the ability to diagnose nerve damage requires specialized diagnostic testing and complex medical knowledge that is beyond the capacity of a lay person. Jandreau v. Nicholson, 492 F.3d 1372, 1377 n.4 (Fed. Cir. 2007). Accordingly, the Board affords higher probative weight to the competent medical evidence. In sum, the most probative evidence does not support the existence of upper extremity nerve damage at any point during the rating period. Therefore, the appeal may not be granted. ANTHONY C. SCIRÉ, JR Veterans Law Judge Board of Veterans' Appeals Attorney for the Board D. Reed, 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.