Citation Nr: 21008451 Decision Date: 02/17/21 Archive Date: 02/17/21 DOCKET NO. 14-05 538 DATE: February 17, 2021 ORDER Entitlement to service connection for headache disability other than migraine cephalgia is denied. INTRODUCTION The Veteran served on active duty from October 1994 to August 1999. This matter comes before the Board of Veterans’ Appeals (Board) on appeal from a rating decision by a Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Regional Office (RO). In November 2016, the Veteran and her spouse testified at a hearing before the undersigned Veterans Law Judge. A transcript of this hearing has been associated with the claims file. This claim was remanded by the Board in December 2019, in order for the RO to issue a supplemental statement of the case. After the issuance of a July 2020 supplemental statement of the case, the appeal was remitted to the Board for further appellate review. FINDING OF FACT The preponderance of the evidence of record is against finding that the Veteran has had a headache disability other than service-connected migraine cephalgia at any time during or approximate to the pendency of the claim. CONCLUSION OF LAW The criteria for a headache disability other than service-connected migraine cephalgia are not met. 38 U.S.C. §§ 1110, 5107; 38 C.F.R. §§ 3.102, 3.303. REASONS AND BASES FOR FINDING AND CONCLUSION The Veteran is seeking entitlement to service connection for a headache disability. Service connection may be granted for a disability resulting from disease or injury incurred in or aggravated by active service. 38 U.S.C. § 1110; 38 C.F.R. § 3.303. Service connection may be granted for any disease diagnosed after discharge, when all the evidence, including that pertinent to service, establishes that the disability was incurred in service. 38 C.F.R. § 3.303(d). Preliminarily, the Board observes that service connection has already been granted for the Veteran’s migraine cephalgia. The salient issue presented by this claim is, thus, whether the Veteran experiences a headache disability separate and distinct from her already service-connected migraine cephalgia. See Degmetich v. Brown, 104 F.3d 1328, 1333 (1997) (holding that the existence of a current disability is the cornerstone of a claim for VA disability compensation); see also Saunders v. Wilkie, 886 F.3d 1356 (Fed. Cir. 2018). In February 2019, the Veteran underwent a VA examination to address this question. After reviewing the evidence of record and administering a clinical evaluation, the examiner opined as follows: It is as likely as not that the Veteran has only one type of cephalgia which is migraine cephalgia, because the Veteran’s cephalgia symptomatology on [November 22, 2010 VA examination] report and on [January 20, 2019] is consistent with migraine cephalgia. … Migraine cephalgia is not a separate and distinct disability from her cephalgia. Prior to the February 2019 VA examination, service-connection had been granted for the Veteran’s “cephalgia, unknown origin (claimed as migraines).” After the February 2019 VA examination, in a May 2019 rating decision, the scope of service connection was expanded and recaptioned as “migraine cephalgia.” On that occasion, the RO increased the rating from noncompensable to 30 percent, effective August 19, 2010. To date, the Veteran has not submitted or identified evidence that the disability at issue here is separate and distinct from her already service-connected migraine cephalgia. In a December 2020 brief, the Veteran’s representative asserts that a remand is warranted in order to provide the Veteran with a VA examination to evaluate sinusitis as it relates to headaches. The Board observes that service-connected has already been granted for the Veteran’s rhinitis, which was claimed as sinusitis. Presently, a noncompensable rating has been assigned to this disability because the RO determined that it was not manifested by compensable symptoms. 38 C.F.R. § 4.97, Diagnostic Code 6522. If the Veteran is seeking an increased rating for rhinitis or to establish service connection for sinusitis, an appeal involving such a claim must first be perfected before the Board has jurisdiction to consider its merits. The only claim before the Board is entitlement to service connection for a headaches disability beyond headaches contemplated by the 30 percent rating assigned for migraine cephalgia. The most competent and probative evidence of record is the February 2019 VA examiner’s opinion. To the extent that the Veteran asserts she has a separate and distinct headache disability, the Board finds that such a determination is more suited to the realm of medical, rather than lay, expertise. The Veteran’s statements are competent as to experiencing lay observable symptoms, however a diagnosis is too complex for a layperson to proffer a competent opinion. The evidence of record does not demonstrate that the Veteran possesses the ability, knowledge, or experience to provide competent diagnostic opinions. Jandreau v. Nicholson, 492 F.3d 1372, 1377 (Fed. Cir. 2007). Consequently, the Veteran’s lay assertions do not constitute competent evidence of a headache disability separate and distinct from migraine cephalgia in this case. Lathan v. Brown, 7 Vet. App. 359, 365 (1995). As the preponderance of the evidence is against the claim for service connection for a headache disability other than migraine cephalgia, the claim must be denied. 38 U.S.C. § 5107(b); Gilbert v. Derwinski, 1 Vet. App. 49 (1990). T. REYNOLDS Veterans Law Judge Board of Veterans’ Appeals Attorney for the Board Sean G. Pflugner, 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.