Citation Nr: 21071229
Decision Date: 11/30/21	Archive Date: 11/30/21

DOCKET NO. 17-23 753
DATE: November 30, 2021

REMANDED

The claim for service connection for a back disability is remanded.

REASONS FOR REMAND

The Veteran had active service from May 1981 to June 1981.

An August 2020 Board decision denied service connection for a back disability. The Veteran appealed to the United States Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims (Court). In April 2021, the Court vacated the August 2020 Board decision and remanded the case pursuant to a Joint Motion for Remand (JMR).

According to JMR, in her May 2012 application for compensation, the Veteran indicated that she received treatment from Dr. Saqib in August 1984 and from St. Joseph's Hospital in March 1984. Correspondence was sent to the Veteran in May 2012, requesting that she complete a release to obtain treatment information from  Dr. Saqib and St. Joseph's Hospital. However, the Veteran did not respond. VA did not send a follow-up request. Parties agreed that the Board failed to fulfill its duty to assist by not making reasonable efforts to obtain the private treatment records.  

Review of records shows that in a letter sent to the Veteran dated May 30, 2012, the Agency of Original Jurisdiction (AOJ) asked the Veteran to filled out authorization from for VA to obtain records from Dr. Saqib, St. Joseph's Hospital, and Dr. Caldwell. Accordingly, further development is warranted. 

Of note, parties also agreed that the Board failed to address a May 16, 2012 primary care note listing an assessment/diagnosis of "chronic LBP-x30 yrs after lifting 100lb bed in military".   

The matter is REMANDED for the following action:

Make reasonable efforts to obtain treatment records from Dr. Saqib, St. Joseph's Hospital and Dr. Caldwell, to include re-sending VA Form 21-4142 (Authorization to Disclose Information to VA) and VA Form 21-4142a (General Release for Medical Provider Information to VA) to the Veteran to obtain her authorization for VA to retrieve medical records from the above-mentioned three medical providers on her behalf. (Please note that the Veteran has undergone several name changes, as captioned on the first page of this decision, and as such all of her aliases should be searched.) 

 

 

MATTHEW W. BLACKWELDER

Veterans Law Judge

Board of Veterans' Appeals

Attorney for the Board	Q. Wang, 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.