Citation Nr: 21070937 Decision Date: 11/27/21 Archive Date: 11/27/21 DOCKET NO. 17-18 007 DATE: November 27, 2021 ORDER Entitlement to service connection for a left ankle disorder is granted. Entitlement to service connection for a right ankle disorder is granted. Entitlement to service connection for a low back disorder is granted. FINDINGS OF FACT 1. The Veteran's bilateral ankle disorder was caused by active duty service. 2. The Veteran's low back disorder was caused by active duty service. CONCLUSIONS OF LAW 1. The criteria for entitlement to service connection for a left ankle disorder have been met. 38 U.S.C. §§ 1131, 5107; 38 C.F.R. §§ 3.303, 3.304. 2. The criteria for entitlement to service connection for a right ankle disorder have been met. 38 U.S.C. §§ 1131, 5107; 38 C.F.R. §§ 3.303, 3.304. 3. The criteria for entitlement to service connection for a low back disorder have been met. 38 U.S.C. §§ 1131, 5107; 38 C.F.R. §§ 3.303, 3.304. REASONS AND BASES FOR FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS The Veteran served on active duty from June 1960 to June 1962. In March 2019, the Board denied service connection claims for the bilateral ankle and low back disorders on appeal. The Veteran appealed the denials to the United States Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims (Court). Following the Veteran's appeal, the Court issued a January 2020 Joint Motion for Partial Remand, vacating the denials at issue and remanding the matters to the Board with directions to reevaluate each of the claims and pursue additional development if necessary. In July 2020, the Board again denied the matters on appeal. The Veteran appealed the denials to Court. Following the Veteran's appeal, the Court issued an August 2021 Joint Motion for Remand (JMR), vacating the denials at issue and remanding the matters to the Board with directions to reevaluate each of the claims and pursue additional development if necessary. The Veteran's representative waived regional office review of new evidence in November 2021. Service connection may be granted for disability resulting from disease or injury incurred in or aggravated by active military, naval or air service. 38 U.S.C. §§ 1131; 38 C.F.R. § 3.303(a). Service connection may be granted for any disease diagnosed after discharge when all of the evidence, including that pertinent to service, establishes that the disease was incurred in active service. 38 C.F.R. § 3.303(d). Establishing service connection generally requires medical evidence or, in certain circumstances, lay evidence of the following: (1) a current disability; (2) in-service incurrence or aggravation of a disease or injury; and (3) nexus between the claimed in-service disease or injury and the present disability. See Davidson v. Shinseki, 581 F.3d 1313, 1316 (Fed. Cir. 2009). The Veteran was provided with a private medical opinion from an orthopedic surgeon, Dr. C.P.C., in June 2017. Based upon a complete review of the Veteran's claims file, the examiner provided a positive nexus opinion, finding the Veteran's bilateral ankle and low back disorders were caused by the Veteran's active duty service and documented in-service parachuting injury. The examiner based their opinion on the Veteran's prior medical history, examinations, and description of the disabilities in sufficient detail for the Board to make a fully informed decision. Stefl v. Nicholson, 21 Vet. App. 120, 123 (2007). The Veteran was provided VA ankle and back examinations in October 2015. In May 2018, an addendum opinion was provided to add upon the October 2015 VA examinations. The Court and Board found the opinion provided in May 2018 addendum to be inadequate in the August 2020 JMR. In reviewing the evidence, the Board finds the positive opinions in the June 2017 private evaluation more probative than the combined opinions provided by the 2015 VA examiner and the 2018 VA addendum opinion. See Nieves-Rodriguez v. Peake, 22 Vet. App. 295 (2008). Thus, the benefit of the doubt is afforded to the Veteran, and the Board finds that service connection for bilateral ankle and low back disorders is established. The appeal is thus granted in full. A. C. MACKENZIE Veterans Law Judge Board of Veterans' Appeals Attorney for the Board B. N. Quarles, 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.