Citation Nr: 21027685 Decision Date: 05/06/21 Archive Date: 05/06/21 DOCKET NO. 19-01 181 DATE: May 6, 2021 REMANDED Entitlement to service connection for a right knee disability is remanded. REASONS FOR REMAND The Veteran served on active duty in the United States Air Force from March 1985 to April 1988. This matter originally came before the Board of Veterans' Appeals (Board) on appeal from a June 2015 rating decision by the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Regional Office (RO). In July 2019, the Board issued a decision denying service connection for a right knee disability. The Veteran appealed the matter to the Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims (Court), which vacated the July 2019 Board decision, pursuant to a December 2020 Joint Motion for Remand (JMR). The Court remanded the matter for action consistent with the terms of the JMR. 1. Entitlement to service connection for a right knee disability is remanded. In the December 2020 JMR, the parties agreed that the Board erred in ensuring that the VA met its duty to assist in providing the Veteran with an adequate examination of the right knee. Specifically, the parties noted that the November 2018 VA knee examination was inadequate because the examiner did not address the Veteran's lay statements of continuous knee pain since service, which had not been found to lack credibility. The JMR cited to the Veteran's June 2016 Notice of Disagreement (NOD), in which the Veteran stated that her knee disability started in service and continued to be a problem. Additionally, the parties noted that the Veteran reported injuring her right knee in a motorcycle accident. See Nov. 2018 C&P Examination, p. 2. However, the parties agreed that the examiner erred by failing to provide the date of the accident or address whether the accident was a potential cause of the right knee disability, and if it occurred in service, whether the accident is related to the Veteran's current disability. The parties concluded that remand is warranted to obtain a new examination. Thus, in compliance with the directives of the JMR, the matter must be remanded to the Agency of Original Jurisdiction (AOJ) in order to obtain a new examination of the Veteran's right knee. The matters are REMANDED for the following action: 1. Schedule the Veteran for an examination to ascertain the nature and etiology of her right knee disability. Any indicated evaluations, studies, or tests deemed necessary should be accomplished. The entire claims file, to include a copy of this REMAND, should be made available to the examiner designated to provide the opinion. The examination report must include a discussion of the Veteran's documented medical history and assertions. The examiner should offer comments, an opinion, and a supporting rationale that address whether it is at least likely as not (a 50 percent probability or greater) that the Veteran's right knee disability was incurred in, aggravated by, or is otherwise etiologically related to her active duty service. In rendering an opinion, the examiner must address continuity of symptomatology of the Veteran's right knee disability, which includes addressing her statement in the June 2016 NOD that she felt that the condition happened in service and continued to be a problem. The examiner also must also elicit information from the Veteran regarding her motorcycle accident and how, if it all, it relates to causation and aggravation of her right knee disability. See Nov. 2018 C&P Examination, p. 2. The examiner is advised that the Veteran is competent to report symptoms, treatment, and injuries and that her reports must be taken into account in formulating the requested opinions. The examiner must provide rationale for all proffered opinions. If the examiner is unable to provide any required opinion, he or she should explain why. If the examiner cannot provide an opinion without resorting to mere speculation, he or she shall provide a complete explanation as to why this is so. If the inability to provide a more definitive opinion is the result of a need for additional information, the examiner should identify the additional information that is needed. A. S. CARACCIOLO Veterans Law Judge Board of Veterans' Appeals Attorney for the Board R. Watkins, 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.