Citation Nr: 21011960
Decision Date: 03/03/21	Archive Date: 03/03/21

DOCKET NO. 11-27 002
DATE: March 3, 2021

REMANDED

Entitlement to service connection for a bilateral leg disability is remanded.

REASONS FOR REMAND

The Veteran served on active duty from February 1991 to October 1991.

This case was previously before the Board in August 2017. In a January 2019 memorandum decision, the Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims (Court) remanded the case to the Board. The Board issued a remand in September 2019. 

1. Entitlement to service connection for a bilateral leg disability is remanded.

Unfortunately, there has not been substantial compliance with the Board’s previous remand directives. Another remand is required.  Stegall v. West, 11 Vet. App. 268, 271 (1998). 

 

The Board’s September 2019 remand instructed the AOJ to obtain a new examination and medical opinions regarding the Veteran’s bilateral leg disability. The examiner was instructed to find as conclusive fact that functional impairment of earning capacity exists with regard to the Veteran’s claimed bilateral leg pain. The remand instructions also required the examiner to specifically discuss the Veteran’s lay statements of record. The medical opinions provided in October 2020 failed to follow these directives. Further, the stated rationales consisted merely of a listing of the facts of the case without explanation. 

The matters are REMANDED for the following action:

1. Obtain an addendum opinion from an appropriate clinician. The examiner should identify all bilateral leg disorders found, to include bilateral leg pain/cramping. The examiner is to find as conclusive fact that a functional impairment of earning capacity exists with regards to the Veteran’s claimed bilateral leg pain. 

Then, the examiner should provide an opinion regarding whether any disorders found more likely, less likely, or at least as likely as not (50 percent or greater probability) began in or is otherwise related to military service, to include the Veteran’s noted reports of pain and cramping during military service. 

Finally, the examiner should also specifically discuss the Veteran’s lay statements of record regarding onset of symptoms and any continuity of symptomatology since onset and/or since discharge from service. The examiner should also consider any other pertinent evidence of record, as appropriate. All findings should be reported in detail and all opinions must be accompanied by a clear rationale.

2. After the above development, and any additionally indicated development, has been completed, readjudicate the issues on appeal. If the benefit sought is not granted to the Veteran’s satisfaction, send the Veteran and her representative a Supplemental Statement of the Case and provide an opportunity to respond.  If necessary, return the case to the Board for further appellate review.

 

 

H. N. SCHWARTZ

Veterans Law Judge

Board of Veterans’ Appeals

Attorney for the Board	A. Creegan

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.