Citation Nr: 21071225 Decision Date: 11/30/21 Archive Date: 11/30/21 DOCKET NO. 17-30 109 DATE: November 30, 2021 REMANDED Service connection for left hip condition is remanded. Service connection for right hip condition is remanded. Service connection for lung condition with shortness of breath and breathing problems is remanded. Service connection for left middle finger with scar is remanded. REASONS FOR REMAND Bilateral hip, lung and left middle finger scar conditions The Veteran served on active duty in the United States Army from April 1966 to April 1968, including service in the Republic of Vietnam. His decorations include the Bronze Star Medal. In April 2019, the Veteran testified at a hearing before the undersigned Veterans Law Judge. This case was previously before the Board in May 2019, November 2019, and March 2021 and remanded for additional development. In a November 2019 decision, the Board denied service connection for bilateral hip, left middle finger scar and lung condition. The Veteran appealed the Board's November 2019 decision to the United States Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims (CAVC) pursuant to a joint motion for partial remand (JMPR), granted an order vacating the Board's November 2019 decision and remanding the case for additional development. On March 2021, the Board remanded this case in accordance with the September 2020 JMPR and with instructions for the examiner to consider the medical and lay evidence on record and determine the onset, etiology and nature of the remanded conditions, as well, to indicate if the conditions are related to service or his service-connected conditions. Subsequently, in August 2021, the examiner reviewed the Veteran's file without the Veteran present and provided negative nexus opinions for the remanded conditions. See VA medical examination (August 2021). However, the Board finds that the latest VA examinations were not adequate and did not provide a complete rationale regarding the onset and nature of the Veteran's remanded conditions. Id. Additionally, the Veteran must be afforded the opportunity to an in-person exam where he can provide medical and lay evidence regarding his appeal. Further, as to the inadequacy of these examinations, the Board finds that it did not follow Miller v. Wilkie, 32 Vet. Ap. 249 (2020) for the proposition that "the proper remedy is to order a new examination where a VA medical examiner fails to address the veteran's statements about medical history and the Board does not address the credibility of those statements."). As there is no adequate opinion and Miller-compliant examinations to determine the nature onset and etiology of his bilateral hip, lung and left middle finger scar conditions, a remand of these issues for new examinations is warranted. Thus, the Board must remand these matters for an examiner to review his claims folder and provide opinions necessary to adjudicate this appeal. The matters are REMANDED for the following action: 1. Notify the Veteran that he may submit additional lay statements from himself and from other individuals who have first-hand knowledge, and/or were contemporaneously informed of his in-service and post-service bilateral hip condition, lung condition and left middle finger scar. The Veteran should be provided an appropriate amount of time to submit this lay evidence. 2. Schedule a VA examination (or telehealth interview, if an in-person examination is not feasible). The examiner must opine as to whether it is at least as likely as not that the Veteran's bilateral hip condition, lung condition and left middle finger scar are related to or had its onset in service. Moreover, the examiner must review all the competent medical and lay evidence about the Veteran's remanded conditions onset, etiology, nature and cause. Additionally, the examiner must opine if his bilateral hip condition, lung condition and left middle finger scar are related to his injuries in service or aggravated or proximately due by service or his service-connected conditions. (Continued on the next page) In offering this opinion, the examiner must acknowledge and discuss the Veteran's competent lay statements of his conditions and any lay evidence regarding the onset of his disabilities and any relation to his service-connected disabilities. STEVEN D. REISS Veterans Law Judge Board of Veterans' Appeals Attorney for the Board M. Alvarado- 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.