Citation Nr: 21007090 Decision Date: 02/08/21 Archive Date: 02/08/21 DOCKET NO. 13-30 975 DATE: February 8, 2021 REMANDED Entitlement to service connection for a digestive disorder, to include Barrett’s syndrome, chronic gastritis, and erythematous duodenopathy, to include as secondary to a sleep disorder is remanded. REASONS FOR REMAND The Veteran served on active duty from September 1989 to February 1997, and from February 2004 to December 2004. He had a period of active duty for special work (ADSW) from October 1, 2008 to December 31, 2008. The Veteran also had periods of National Guard and Reserve service, This matter comes before the Board of Veterans’ Appeals (Board) on appeal from a January 2012 rating decision issued by the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Regional Office (RO) in Detroit, Michigan. The Board remanded this matter in July 2015. The Veteran testified at a videoconference hearing before the undersigned Veterans Law Judge in January 2017. A transcript of the hearing is of record. The Board remanded this matter again in October 2017. In a July 2019 decision, the Board denied service connection for a sleep disorder, to include narcolepsy with cataplexy, sleep paralysis, and sleep apnea, and a digestive disorder, to include Barrett’s syndrome, chronic gastritis, and erythematous duodenopathy, to include as secondary to a sleep disorder. The Veteran appealed the Board’s July 2019 decision to the United States Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims (Court). In a June 2020 Order, the Court vacated, in part, the July 2019 Board decision, and remanded the issue of service connection for a digestive disorder, to include Barrett’s syndrome, chronic gastritis, and erythematous duodenopathy, to include as secondary to a sleep disorder to the Board for further development. Entitlement to service connection for a digestive disorder, to include Barrett’s syndrome, chronic gastritis, and erythematous duodenopathy, to include as secondary to a sleep disorder is remanded. In the June 2020 Court Order, the Court determined that the Board erroneously relied on the November 2017 and December 2018 VA opinions. Specifically, the Court found that the November 2017 VA examiner failed to address any of the Veteran’s service treatment records that showed various digestive symptoms from his period of service from September 1989 to February 1997. Additionally, the November 2017 VA examiner failed to provide any discussion of a February 2010 VA opinion that Barrett’s esophagus may have been caused by chronic heartburn. The examiner also failed to provide any information of whether the Veteran’s in-service symptoms were akin to chronic heartburn that may have caused his diagnosed Barrett’s esophagus. The Court also found that, similarly, the February 2018 VA examiner failed to address the Veteran’s various medical records from his first period of active duty and noted that the examiner’s rationale was the same as the November 2017 VA opinion. The Board is bound by these findings by the Court. Therefore, on remand, a clarifying VA opinion, and/or VA examination if determined necessary, must be obtained to determine the etiology of the Veteran’s digestive disorder. The matters are REMANDED for the following actions: 1. Obtain any outstanding VA or private treatment records. Request that the Veteran assist with locating these records, if possible. Associate these records with the claims file. 2. Then, obtain a VA opinion, or VA examination if deemed necessary, by an appropriate examiner to determine the etiology of the Veteran’s digestive disorder, to include Barrett’s syndrome, chronic gastritis, and erythematous duodenopathy. The claims file and a copy of this remand must be made available for review. Following a review of the pertinent evidence, the examiner must determine whether it is at least as likely as not (50 percent or greater probability) that the Veteran’s digestive disorder, to include Barrett’s syndrome, chronic gastritis, and erythematous duodenopathy, is caused by or related to service. A clear rationale must be provided for all opinions expressed. The examiner must consider and discuss the following: 1) Veteran’s lay statements; 2) In-service treatment records specifically showing various digestive symptoms from September 1989 to February 1997, and in later periods of service; 3) February 2010 positive VA opinion that Barrett’s esophagus might have been caused by chronic heartburn; 4) Whether in-service digestive symptoms were akin to chronic heartburn that might have caused the Barrett’s esophagus. The examiner must not reference the November 2017 or February 2018 VA opinions when providing an opinion, as these have been found to be inadequate. If the examiner is unable to provide an opinion without resorting to mere speculation, then the examiner must state this and provide any information needed to make an opinion, if possible. If it is determined that a VA examination must be scheduled, the Board acknowledges that due to the COVID-19 pandemic, it may be difficult to schedule VA examinations. The Veteran should be afforded the opportunity to postpone his examination until such time as it can be scheduled. Alternatively, if appropriate, the RO may schedule a telemed examination or obtain a VA medical opinion(s) only. 3. Thereafter, readjudicate the claim on appeal. If the benefit sought remains denied, issue the Veteran and his representative a supplemental statement of the case and provide a reasonable opportunity to respond before returning the matter to the Board for further appellate review. MICHAEL MARTIN Veterans Law Judge Board of Veterans’ Appeals Attorney for the Board Saudiee Brown 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.