Citation Nr: 21072033 Decision Date: 12/02/21 Archive Date: 12/02/21 DOCKET NO. 13-14 470 DATE: December 2, 2021 REMANDED Entitlement to a compensable disability rating for limitation of flexion left knee is remanded. Entitlement to a disability rating in excess of 10 percent for limitation of extension of the left knee is remanded. Entitlement to an effective date earlier than March 12, 2016, for the grant of service connection for limitation of flexion of the left knee is remanded. Entitlement to a finding of total disability based on individual unemployability (TDIU), due solely to the service-connected left knee disability, is remanded. REASONS FOR REMAND The Veteran had active duty service with the U.S. Army from August 1978 to September 1979. This case comes before the Board of Veteran's Appeals (Board) on appeal from a June 2012 rating decision of the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) agency of original jurisdiction (AOJ). The Veteran testified regarding the issues on appeal at two separate hearings in May 2019 and January 2021; during the latter hearing, two Veterans Law Judges were able to participate, and so there is no need for scheduling a third hearing. Arneson v. Shinseki, 24 Vet. App. 379 (2011). All panel signatories have taken testimony from the Veteran. The Board notes that the Veteran has an ongoing appeal for entitlement to TDIU under the Appeals Modernization Act (AMA), in connection with some other disabilities. To avoid jurisdictional confusion, consideration here pertains solely entitlement to TDIU based on the left knee, as part of that claim for increase. Rice v. Shinseki, 22 Vet. App. 447 (2009). Left Knee In January 2021, the Veteran testified that his condition was worse. He indicated that sometimes his knee would give way and would cause him to fall. He stated that he was unable to bend his leg back. The Veteran submitted an April 2021 letter from Dr. MF. Dr. MF noted that the Veteran had tried physiotherapy, aqua therapy, and steroid injections, but still had left knee pain. Dr. MF wrote that his disability had worsened. A new examination is appropriate when there is an assertion (and indication) of an increase in severity since the last examination. Earlier Effective Date The Board finds that the earlier effective date claim is intertwined with the increased rating claim for his left knee currently being remanded. As was noted at the January 2021 hearing, the question of effective date may be recharacterized as part of the increased rating appeal, as evaluation under alternative and multiple Diagnostic Codes throughout the appeal period must also be considered. Therefore, this issue should also be remanded. Harris v. Derwinski, 1 Vet. App. 180 (1991). TDIU Because a decision on the claims for increased rating that are being remanded could significantly impact a decision on the issue of entitlement to TDIU due to the left knee, the issue is inextricably intertwined. Therefore, further consideration of the claim for a TDIU must be deferred. The matters are REMANDED for the following action: 1. Obtain updated VA treatment records and associate such with the claims file. 2. Schedule the Veteran for a VA knee examination to determine the current severity of the Veteran's service-connected left knee disability. The examiner must identify all manifestations and symptoms of the left knee disability, to include description of functional capacity with repeated movement and on flare-up, and with and without weight bearing. The examiner must specifically address whether there is any instability in the knee as well as any meniscal damage. The extent of any identified damage, associated symptoms, and functional impairment must be described. 3. Thereafter, readjudicate the remanded issues. If any benefit sought remains denied, issue a supplemental statement of the case. The case should then be returned to the Board for appellate review if otherwise in order. WILLIAM H. DONNELLY Veterans Law Judge Board of Veterans' Appeals B. MULLINS Veterans Law Judge Board of Veterans' Appeals Emily Tamlyn Veterans Law Judge Board of Veterans' Appeals Attorney for the Board S. Baxter, 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.