Citation Nr: 21012528 Decision Date: 03/04/21 Archive Date: 03/04/21 DOCKET NO. 11-25 856 DATE: March 4, 2021 REMANDED Entitlement to a rating in excess of 10 percent for left knee sprain is remanded. REASONS FOR REMAND The Veteran served on active duty from February 2006 to May 2007 and from August 2008 to October 2009, with additional service in the National Guard. This matter comes before the Board of Veterans’ Appeals (Board) on appeal from the April 2010 rating decision of the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Regional Office (RO). The Veteran appealed the April 2010 rating decision, which, inter alia, granted service connection for left knee sprain and assigned a 10 percent initial rating. In October 2017, the Board remanded the claim to obtain an adequate VA examination, as the prior examinations did not comply with the holding in Correia v. McDonald, 28 Vet. App. 158 (2016). The Veteran did not appear for the scheduled November 2017 VA compensation examination. In June 2018, the Board denied an increased rating for the left knee sprain. The Veteran timely appealed the June 2018 Board denial to the United States Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims (Court). In an April 2020 Memorandum Decision, the Court set aside the Board’s denial and remanded for further development. Specifically, the Court found that the Board erred by not providing adequate reasons and bases in their denial of an increased rating, failing to address the Veteran’s reports of flare ups and their accompanying symptoms and his difficulties sitting, standing, and performing other weightbearing movements, in light of the holding in DeLuca v. Brown, 8 Vet. App. 202 (1995). See Memorandum Decision, page 5-6. The claim has been returned to Board for development as indicated in the Memorandum Decision. On review, the Board finds that additional medical evidence is needed to assess any functional limitations the Veteran experiences during a left knee flare-up. Although the Court clarified that a VA opinion may be obtained in lieu of an examination to assess the needed information, the Board finds that an updated examination at this juncture would be beneficial since the last VA compensation of the knee was conducted many years ago, in 2013. The matter is REMANDED for the following action: 1. Ensure all outstanding treatment records are associated with the file. 2. Thereafter, provide the Veteran with a VA compensation examination by an appropriate clinician to determine the current severity of his service-connected left knee sprain. (a) NOTE: If an examination is not feasible, please obtain a VA medical opinion in lieu, in which the reviewing examiner addresses the number and duration of any left knee flare-ups and their resultant limitations since October 2009. See February and November 2010 VA examination reports, 2012 DRO hearing testimony; and January 2013 VA examination report. If an examination is feasible, the examiner is asked to: (b) Provide a full description of the service-connected eft knee disability and report all signs and symptoms necessary for evaluating the Veteran’s disability under the rating criteria. (c) Full range of motion testing must be performed where possible. The joint(s) involved should be tested in both (1) active motion, (2) passing motion, (3) in weight-bearing, (4) in non-weight-bearing, and (5) if possible, with range of motion of the opposite undamaged joint. If the examiner is unable to conduct the required testing or concludes that the required testing is not necessary in this case, he or should clearly explain why that is so. (d) Increased functional loss during a flare-up and after repetitive use must be considered. The examiner must consider all procurable and ascertainable data and describe the extent of any pain, incoordination, weakened movement, and excess fatigability on use, and, to the extent possible, report functional impairment due to such factors in terms of additional degrees of limitation of motion. (e) Address the number and duration of any left knee flare-ups and their resultant limitations since October 2009. See February and November 2010 VA examination reports, 2012 DRO hearing testimony; and January 2013 VA examination report. A rationale for any opinions expressed should be set forth. (Continued on the next page)   3. Thereafter, readjudicate the claim. S. B. MAYS Veterans Law Judge Board of Veterans’ Appeals Attorney for the Board M. Moldawer, 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.