Citation Nr: 21022591 Decision Date: 04/16/21 Archive Date: 04/16/21 DOCKET NO. 18-51 500 DATE: April 16, 2021 REMANDED Entitlement to service connection for left knee condition is remanded. REASONS FOR REMAND The Veteran served on active duty from April 2017 to July 2017. This case is before the Board of Veterans’ Appeals (Board) on appeal from an April 2018 Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Regional Office (RO) rating decision. In that rating decision, the RO denied entitlement to service connection for a left knee condition. The Veteran’s notice of disagreement was received in May 2018. The RO issued a statement of the case in September 2018. The Veteran’s VA Form 9, substantive appeal to the Board, was received in October 2018. The Veteran requested an optional Board hearing, which was first scheduled to occur in March 19, 2020. Upon the Veteran’s request, the Board hearing was rescheduled to occur on May 28, 2020. However, a VA representative memorialized a telephonic contact with the Veteran on April 17, 2020, in which the Veteran elected not to have a virtual hearing, electing to decide the claim of the evidence of record. See April 17, 2020 VA 21-0820. Therefore, the request for a hearing is considered withdrawn. 38 C.F.R. § 20.704(d). In July 2020 the Board remanded the case to the RO with very specific remand instructions. Specifically, an addendum medical opinion based on a thorough review of the medical evidence and record. However, it appears that the Agency of Original Jurisdiction (AOJ) scheduled the Veteran for an in-person examination; the Veteran declined to report for the examination due to concerns regarding COVID-19. Based on the Veteran’s “refusal” to report for an examination, the AOJ denied the Veteran’s claim in a subsequent Supplemental Statement of the Case (SSOC) without obtaining the requested medical opinions from the Board’s previous remand. Accordingly, as the AOJ has not substantially complied with the remand directives or otherwise indicated why such compliance is not possible, the Board must again remand this case in order to obtain the previously requested medical opinions to ensure compliance with the Board’s previous remand directives. See Barr v. Nicholson, 21 Vet. App. 303, 311 (2007); see also Stegall v. West, 11 Vet. App. 268 (1998) (A remand by the Board confers upon the claimant, as a matter of law, the right to compliance with the remand order). The matters are REMANDED for the following action: 1. Obtain any outstanding available VA medical records concerning the Veteran that have not yet been associated with the claims file. 2. After any outstanding VA treatment records have been added to the claims file, ask an appropriate examiner who has not previously participated in this decision to provide an addendum medical opinion concerning the Veteran’s left knee condition. The examiner should note review of this remand, the July 2020 Board remand, and the entire claims file. The examiner’s attention is directed to: (a) the Veteran’s service treatment records, including all magnetic resonance imaging (MRI); (b) the February 2018 VA knee examination; and, (c) the March 2018 VA knee examination medical opinion. Upon completion of a review of the evidence, the clinician should respond to the following inquiries: a. Whether the evidence clearly and unmistakably (i.e., it is undebatable) shows that the Veteran had a left knee disorder when he entered service on April 25, 2017? b. If yes, does the evidence of record clearly and unmistakably show that the preexisting left knee disorder was not aggravated by service or that any increase in disability was due to the natural progression of the disease? The Board observes “aggravation” in the above context refers to a permanent worsening of the underlying condition, as contrasted to temporary or intermittent flare-ups of symptomatology which resolve with return to the baseline level of disability. Complete rationales should be provided. The clinician should reconcile any opinion with all other clinical evidence of record. MARTIN B. PETERS Acting Veterans Law Judge Board of Veterans’ Appeals Attorney for the Board N. Ardalan, 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.