Citation Nr: 21070246 Decision Date: 11/23/21 Archive Date: 11/23/21 DOCKET NO. 18-37 442 DATE: November 23, 2021 ORDER The application to reopen the previously denied claim of entitlement to service connection for a right wrist disorder is granted. REMANDED Entitlement to service connection for a right wrist osteoarthritis is remanded. Entitlement to an initial rating in excess of 30 percent for sarcoidosis is remanded. FINDING OF FACT The newly obtained medical records show that the Veteran has a current right wrist disorder. CONCLUSION OF LAW New and material evidence has been received to reopen the claim of entitlement to service connection for a right wrist disorder. 38 U.S.C. §§ 5108, 7105; 38 C.F.R. § 3.156. REASONS AND BASES FOR FINDING AND CONCLUSION The Veteran served on active duty from October 1976 to October 1996. 1. Entitlement to service connection for a right wrist disorder is reopened. The Veteran seeks service connection for a right wrist disorder. The VA regional office (RO) denied this claim in a June 2013 rating decision. The Veteran did not appeal the decision. Therefore, the prior denial of service connection for a right wrist disorder is now final, and the Veteran's claim for service connection may only be reopened if new and material evidence is received. 38 U.S.C. § 7105(c); 38 C.F.R. § 20.1103 (2018). "New" evidence means existing evidence not previously submitted to agency decision makers. "Material" evidence means existing evidence that, by itself or when considered with previous evidence of record, relates to an unestablished fact necessary to substantiate the claim. New and material evidence can be neither cumulative nor redundant of the evidence of record at the time of the last prior final denial of the claim sought to be reopened and must raise a reasonable possibility of substantiating the claim. See Shade v. Shinseki, 24 Vet. App. 110, 118 (2010). When evaluating the materiality of newly-submitted evidence, the Board should not focus solely on whether the evidence remedies the principal reason for denial in the last prior decision, but rather should consider whether such evidence, in its entirety, could at least trigger the duty to assist by providing a medical opinion. See Shade, 24 Vet. App. at 117. Moreover, when determining whether a claim should be reopened, the credibility of any newly submitted evidence is to be presumed. See Justus v. Principi, 3 Vet. App. 510, 513 (1992). The June 2013 final rating decision denied service connection for a right wrist disorder on the basis that there was no evidence that the Veteran had a current right wrist disorder. The record contains a July 2010 VA examination report that notes that the Veteran has degenerative joint disease (DJD) of the right wrist. The Board is unable to determine why this VA examination report was not of record and considered by VA in denying the Veteran's claim in the June 2013 rating decision. Regardless, as this medical evidence was not considered at the time of the June 2013 rating decision, it must be considered new evidence, even though it predated the June 2013 rating decision. As this new evidence indicates that the Veteran has a current right wrist disability, which was not found at the time of the prior final decision, it is considered to be new and material evidence to reopen the Veterans claim. Accordingly, new and material evidence has been obtained and the Veteran's claim for service connection for a right wrist disorder is reopened. REASONS FOR REMAND 1. Entitlement to service connection for a right wrist osteoarthritis. In January 2018 a VA examiner opined that the Veteran's current right wrist degenerative joint disease (DJD) is not related to service. The VA examiner supported his opinion by pointing out that the Veteran's right wrist was asymptomatic from 1996 to 2014. This is not supported by the medical records. A July 2010 VA medical record notes right wrist pain and indicates that the Veteran reported right wrist pain since 2004. Consequently, the Veteran's claim must be remanded for a new VA examination that accurately considers the Veteran's right wrist medical history. 2. Entitlement to an increased rating for sarcoidosis is remanded. The February 2018 rating decision on appeal granted the Veteran service connection for sarcoidosis and assigned a 10 percent rating. A June 2018 rating decision granted the Veteran an increased rating of 30 percent since the grant of service connection, May 23, 2017. The Veteran seeks a rating in excess of 30 percent. At his April 2021 hearing the Veteran testified that his sarcoidosis disability had increased in severity since his last VA examination. The Veteran must be provided a new VA sarcoidosis examination to determine the current severity of his sarcoidosis disability. See Snuffer v. Gober, 10 Vet. App. 400 (1997). The matters are REMANDED for the following action: 1. In remanding this case, the Board makes no credibility determination, expressed or implied, at this juncture. 2. Obtain the Veteran's updated VA treatment records. 3. Contact the Veteran and request that he either provide any outstanding relevant treatment records from any private provider, or complete a release for such providers; if any releases are returned, attempt to obtain the identified records. If any records requested are not ultimately obtained, notify the Veteran. The Veteran must then be given an opportunity to respond 4. After the above has been completed, provide the Veteran a VA examination by a pulmonologist to determine the current severity of his sarcoidosis. The examiner must provide a full description of the nature of this disability and report all signs and symptoms necessary for evaluating the Veteran's disability under the rating criteria. All symptoms and functional impairments due to sarcoidosis, to include an opinion on their severity, must be identified. 5. Provide the Veteran a VA examination of the right wrist. The examiner should provide an opinion as to whether it is at least as likely as not (a 50 percent or better probability) that the Veteran has any right wrist disorder that had its onset during service or was manifest within a year from service discharge in October 1996. The examiner should discuss a July 2010 VA examination report that diagnosed right wrist degenerative joint disease and that indicates that the Veteran reported that he had had right wrist pain since 2004. The term "at least as likely as not" does not mean within the realm of medical possibility, but rather that the medical evidence both for and against a certain conclusion is so evenly divided that it is as medically sound to find in favor of such a conclusion as it is to find against it. A complete rationale for the opinions rendered must be provided. If you cannot provide the requested opinions without resorting to speculation, please expressly indicate this and provide a supporting rationale as to why that is so. G. A. WASIK Veterans Law Judge Board of Veterans' Appeals Attorney for the Board R. E. Jones, 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.