Citation Nr: 21030962 Decision Date: 05/20/21 Archive Date: 05/20/21 DOCKET NO. 08-23 526 DATE: May 20, 2021 REMANDED Entitlement to an initial rating in excess of 10 percent for right knee disability is remanded. REASONS FOR REMAND The Veteran served on active duty from March 1996 to January 2001. This matter comes before the Board of Veterans' Appeals (Board) on appeal from a November 2006 rating decision issued by a Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Regional Office (RO). In August 2009, the Veteran testified at a hearing before a Veterans Law Judge who is no longer with the Board; a transcript is of record. A February 2015 letter notified the Veteran that the VLJ who presided over the hearing was no longer with the Board and informed him of his right to testify at a new hearing if so desired. The Veteran was provided 30 days to respond but did not do so. Accordingly, the Board will consider the appeal based on the evidence of record. 38 U.S.C. § 7107(c). A May 2014 Board decision denied the appeal. The Veteran appealed the Board's decision to the United States Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims (Court). A February 2015 Order of the Court granted the parties' Joint Motion for Remand (JMR), vacated the Board's decision, and returned the claim to the Board. In August 2015, April 2016, April 2017, and February 2018, the Board remanded the appeal for further development. A December 2019 Board decision again denied the appeal. The Veteran appealed the Board's decision to the United States Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims (Court). A December 2020 Order of the Court granted the parties' Joint Motion for Remand (JMR), vacated the Board's decision, and returned the claim to the Board. 1. Entitlement to an initial rating in excess of 10 percent for right knee disability is remanded. In the December 2020 JMR, the parties noted that the Veteran's legal name is "Jimmy A. Davis, Jr." The Veteran asserted that due to prior confusion concerning his legal name, the Board should confirm that all VA records have been associated with his VA claims file. At times the Veteran has previously been referred to as "James A. Davis, Jr." by the VA. Accordingly, remand is necessary in order to provide an opportunity to confirm that all outstanding records in the possession of VA have been associated with the Veteran's claims file, and to make sure that all VA treatment records are up to date. The matter is REMANDED for the following action: Obtain updated VA treatment records since February 2016. Confirm that any outstanding VA records dated since June 2006 for "Jimmy A. Davis, Jr." have been associated with the claims file. If any records are identified that have not been associated with the claims file, obtain and associate them with the Veteran's claims file. The Veteran is known to have received care at the VA medical center located in Salisbury, North Carolina, and the Kernersville VA outpatient clinic, but may have received care at other facilities. The Board notes that at times the Veteran has been referred to as "James A. Davis, Jr." Any records incorrectly referring to the Veteran as such should be identified and associated with the claims file as well. D. JOHNSON Veterans Law Judge Board of Veterans' Appeals Attorney for the Board R. Caban, 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.