Citation Nr: 21013208 Decision Date: 03/09/21 Archive Date: 03/09/21 DOCKET NO. 14-06 240A DATE: March 9, 2021 REMANDED 1. Entitlement to an initial rating in excess of 10 percent for patellofemoral syndrome of the right knee is remanded. 2. Entitlement to an initial rating in excess of 10 percent for patellofemoral syndrome of the left knee is remanded. REASONS FOR REMAND The Veteran had active service from December 1977 to November 1981, and from November 1982 to November 1998. An August 2019 Board of Veterans’ Appeals (Board) denied the Veteran’s claims for entitlement to initial ratings in excess of 10 percent for both patellofemoral knee disabilities. In September 2020, United States Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims (CAVC) issued a joint motion for remand (JMR) setting aside the Board’s decision and remanded the Veteran’s claims to the Board for further consideration. 1. Entitlement to an initial rating in excess of 10 percent for patellofemoral syndrome of the right knee is remanded. 2. Entitlement to an initial rating in excess of 10 percent for patellofemoral syndrome of the left knee is remanded. The Board finds that additional pertinent evidence has been added to the record since the most recent Supplemental Statement of the Case (SSOC), dated August 2019. This evidence includes additional VA medical records (CAPRI). While the Board is cognizant that 38 U.S.C. § 7105(e) provides an automatic waiver of initial AOJ review if a veteran submits evidence to the AOJ, or to the Board with, or after submission of, a substantive appeal in cases where the substantive appeal was filed on or after February 2, 2013. Here, the evidence is VA-generated medical evidence, and not evidence submitted by the Veteran. Thus, the Board finds that an automatic waiver of jurisdiction cannot be applied in this case. In January 2021, the Board sent a letter to the Veteran informing him of the additional evidence and his right to have the AOJ review the evidence in the first instance. The Board told the Veteran that he could waive that right by submitting a waiver in writing. The letter stated that the Veteran had 45 days to respond and that if the Board did not hear back from him during that time period, it would assume he did not want to waive initial consideration of that evidence by the AOJ. To date, no written response has been received, and it has been more than 45 days since the January 2021 letter was mailed. As this additional evidence contains relevant evidence to each of the issues on appeal and includes evidence that has not previously been reviewed by the AOJ in the first instance, and neither the Veteran nor the representative waived AOJ consideration of this evidence in the first instance, a remand is necessary for the issuance of a supplemental statement of the case (SSOC) that considers all evidence of record associated with the claims file. 38 C.F.R. §§ 19.31, 19.37. The matters are REMANDED for the following action: After undertaking any additional development which may be necessary, the AOJ should readjudicate the claim based on the entirety of the evidence, to include consideration of all evidence added to the record since the issuance of the August 2019 SSOC for the issues on appeal. A. P. SIMPSON Veterans Law Judge Board of Veterans’ Appeals Attorney for the Board N. Griffin, 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.