Citation Nr: 21071413
Decision Date: 11/30/21	Archive Date: 11/30/21

DOCKET NO. 15-39 840
DATE: November 30, 2021

REMANDED

Service connection for a bilateral foot disorder.

REASONS FOR REMAND

In June 2019, the Board service connection for a bilateral foot disorder. The Veteran appealed to the Veterans Claims Court. In August 2020, the Court Clerk granted a Joint Motion for Partial Remand (JMPR) and remanded the claim to the Board for readjudication. 

Specifically, the March 2015 VA examination was found to be inadequate as the physician did not discuss whether the bilateral foot disorder was a congenital disease or defect. Further, the opinion did not discuss the relationship between a current foot disorder and ankle disorder. Accordingly, a remand is necessary to obtain a new medical opinion. 

The matter is REMANDED for the following actions:

1. Identify and obtain any outstanding VA treatment records and associate them with the claims file. 

2. Direct the claims file to a clinician to address the etiology of the Veteran's bilateral foot disorder. Specifically, the clinician is asked to address the following: 

	Discuss whether the Veteran's bilateral foot disorder is a congenital disease or congenital defect. 

	If the bilateral foot disorder is a congenital disease, the clinician is asked to address whether the disorder pre-existed service. 

	If it pre-existed service, the clinician is asked to address whether it was aggravated beyond its normal progression during service.

	If the bilateral foot disorder is a congenital defect, the clinician is asked to address whether it was subject to a superimposed disease or injury during service. 

	For any other foot disorder or ankle disorder identified, the clinician is asked to provide a medical opinion regarding whether it is at least as likely as not (50 percent or greater probability) that such disorder had onset in, or is otherwise related to, active duty. 

	The clinician is further asked to discuss any relationship between a bilateral foot disorder and bilateral ankle disorder. 

 

3. If the clinician determines that an examination is necessary in order to provide the requested opinion, then one should be scheduled. 

 

L. HOWELL

Veterans Law Judge

Board of Veterans' Appeals

Attorney for the Board	T. Kokolas, 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 This decision is not precedential and does not establish VA policies or interpretations of general applicability. 38 C.F.R. § 20.1303.