Citation Nr: 21023988 Decision Date: 04/21/21 Archive Date: 04/21/21 DOCKET NO. 17-10 073 DATE: April 21, 2021 REMANDED Entitlement to service connection for a right hip disability is remanded. REASONS FOR REMAND The Veteran had active service with the Air Force from January 1961 to December 1964. This matter is before the Board of Veterans’ Appeals (the Board) on appeal from an October 2016 rating decision of the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Regional Office (RO). In March 2018, the Veteran testified in a videoconference hearing before the undersigned Veterans Law Judge. A transcript of the hearing is in the evidence of record. In August 2019, the Board denied entitlement to service connection for a right hip disability, to include as secondary to his service-connected left knee strain and chondromalacia. The Veteran subsequently appealed the August 2019 Board decision to the United States Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims (the Court). In a June 2020 order, the Court granted the parties’ Joint Motion for Remand (JMR), vacating the Boards’ August 2019 decision regarding the denial of entitlement to service connection for a right hip disability, and remanded the appeal to the Board for readjudication consistent with the JMR. In November 2020, the Board again remanded this matter for additional development. The Board finds that more development is necessary prior to final adjudication of the claim on appeal. As noted by the Board in its November 2020 remand, the June 2020 JMR determined that while the Veteran underwent a VA examination in June 2019, there was not substantial compliance with January 2019 Board remand per Stegall v. West, 11 Vet. App. 268 (1998). Specifically, the VA examiner provided an inadequate rationale for finding that the Veteran’s current right hip disability was not caused by an in-service event or injury as the examiner acknowledged an in-service pelvic injury in April 1963 but did not provide a well-reasoned medical explanation as to why the current disability was not related to the in-service pelvic injury. Additionally, the examiner also did not address if the current disability was due to the Veteran playing basketball in service. As a result, the Board again remanded this issue for a new VA examination to specifically address the deficiencies noted in the June 2019 VA examination. The instructions specifically indicated that the examiner was to address whether the Veteran’s current disability was related to an in-service pelvic injury and whether the current disability was due to the Veteran playing basketball in service. Pursuant to the November 2020 Board remand, the Veteran was afforded an examination in December 2020. The December 2020 VA examiner opined that it was less likely than not that the Veteran’s right hip disability was incurred in, caused by or related to an in-service event, injury or illness as there were no complaints of right hip pain in service. However, the December 2020 VA examiner again did not specifically address whether the Veteran’s current right hip disability was related to an in-service pelvic injury and whether the current disability was due to the Veteran playing basketball in service. Thus, this opinion also does not adequately address whether the Veteran’s currently diagnosed right hip disability was related to service to include as due to an in-service pelvic injury or the Veteran playing basketball in service as instructed by the January 2019 and November 2020 Board remand instructions. As a result, there has not been compliance with the Board’s January 2019 and November 2020 instructions. The United States Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims has held that a remand confers on the veteran, as a matter of law, the right to compliance with the remand orders. Stegall v. West, 11 Vet. App. 268, 271 (1998). Thus, this issue is once again being remanded to ensure compliance with the Board’s January 2019 and November 2020 remand directives in order to determine whether the Veteran has a current right hip disability that is the result of his service. The matters are REMANDED for the following action: 1. The Veteran should be requested to provide the names, addresses and approximate dates of treatment of all medical care providers, VA and non-VA, who have treated him for the disability on appeal. After the Veteran has signed the appropriate releases, those records should be obtained and associated with the claims folder. 2. Return the claims file to the VA examiner that examined the Veteran in December 2020. If that examiner is not available, return the file to another examiner with the appropriate knowledge and expertise. If the new examiner feels that an actual physical examination is necessary, such examination should be scheduled. The examiner should opine as to whether the Veteran’s right hip disability is related to an in-service injury, event, or disease, including an in-service pelvis injury in April 1963 and the in-service injury while playing basketball. In formulating the opinion, the examiner should specifically address the in-service pelvis injury and the Veteran playing basketball in service. All opinions expressed by the examiner must be accompanied by a complete rationale. All studies deemed appropriate in the medical opinion of the examiner should be performed, and all the findings should be set forth in detail. The claims file should be made available to the examiner, who should review the entire claims folder. 3. Ensure that the examination report complies with this remand and answers the questions presented herein. If any report is insufficient, it should be returned to the examiner for necessary corrective action, as appropriate. See Stegall v. West, 11 Vet. App. 268 (1998). 4. After completion of the above and any additional development deemed necessary, the issue on appeal should be reviewed with consideration of all applicable laws and regulations. If any benefit sought remains denied, the Veteran should be furnished a supplemental statement of the case and be afforded the opportunity to   respond. Thereafter, the case should be returned to the Board for appellate review, if in order. MICHAEL LANE Veterans Law Judge Board of Veterans’ Appeals Attorney for the Board James A. DeFrank, 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.