Citation Nr: 21039918 Decision Date: 07/01/21 Archive Date: 07/01/21 DOCKET NO. 19-05 605 DATE: July 1, 2021 ORDER Entitlement to service connection for a cervical spine disability, to include cervical strain, is granted. FINDING OF FACT The Veteran's cervical spine disability, to include cervical strain, is etiologically related to his time in active service. CONCLUSION OF LAW The criteria to establish service connection for a cervical spine disability, to include cervical strain, have been met. 38 U.S.C. §§ 1110, 1131, 5107; 38 C.F.R. §§ 3.102, 3.303. REASONS AND BASES FOR FINDING AND CONCLUSION The Veteran had active service from September 1990 to September 1994. He appealed a January 2018 rating decision by the Agency of Original Jurisdiction (AOJ). A May 2019 Board decision denied the Veteran's claim. The Veteran appealed to the U.S. Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims (Court). In May 2020, the Court granted a Joint Motion for Partial Remand (JMPR) filed by the representatives for both parties and remanded the claim to the Board for further proceedings consistent with the JMPR. In January 2021, the Board remanded the appeal to afford the Veteran an examination to determine the nature and etiology of his cervical spine disability. The Board notes that the Veteran's representative specifically questioned the credentials of the examiner who conducted the April 2021 cervical spine examination and asked for the examiner's curriculum vitae and other information about the examiner's qualifications. See June 2021 Appellate Brief, pg. 2. Typically, the Veteran and his representative would be sent the VA examiner's credentials and the body of the decision would require factual findings of the examiner's competency in providing a medical opinion. See Francway v. Wilkie, 940 F.3d 1304, 1308-1309 (Fed. Cir. 2019). However, since this decision renders a full grant of benefits sought, any failure to address the competency of the examiner is considered non-prejudicial to the Veteran. A veteran is entitled to the Department of Veteran Affairs (VA) disability compensation if there is a disability resulting from personal injury suffered or disease contracted in the line of duty in active service, or for aggravation of a preexisting injury suffered or disease contracted in the line of duty in active service. 38 U.S.C. §§ 1110, 1131. Generally, to establish a right to compensation for a present disability, a veteran must show: (1) a present disability; (2) an in-service incurrence or aggravation of a disease or injury; and (3) a causal relationship between the present disability and the disease or injury incurred or aggravated during service, the so-called "nexus" requirement. Shedden v. Principi, 381 F.3d 1163, 1167 (Fed. Cir. 2004). Service connection may be granted for any disease diagnosed after discharge, when all of the evidence, including that pertinent to service, establishes that a disease was incurred in service. 38 C.F.R. § 3.303(d). The Veteran is diagnosed with cervical strain. See April 2021 examination report. The Veteran's service treatment records document no specific reports of cervical spine complaints or injuries, although the Veteran's July 1994 report of medical history includes a notation of recurrent back pain. Moreover, the Veteran reported he had neck pain since an incident in which he was struck in the head with a Kevlar helmet during basic training. See February 2018 statement from F.G., and May 2018 private medical records noting Veteran's reported history. As to nexus, there are conflicting opinions. An August 2020 opinion from Dr. K.K. opined that the Veteran's cervical spine disability was related to injuries he sustained during service. In an April 2021 opinion obtained by VA, an examiner opined that the Veteran's cervical spine disability was not related to service, reasoning that there was no objective evidence to indicate a causal relationship between the Veteran's reported neck injury and his claimed cervical spine disability. The Board has the responsibility of weighing conflicting medical opinions and may place greater weight on one physician's opinion over another depending upon factors such as reasoning employed by the physicians and the extent to which they reviewed prior clinical records and other evidence. See Nieves-Rodriguez v. Peake, 22 Vet. App. 295, 304 (2008); Prejean v. West, 13 Vet. App. 444, 44849 (2000) (stating that factors for assessing the probative value of a medical opinion include the thoroughness and detail of the opinion). The Board acknowledges that the August 2020 opinion from Dr. K.K. does not contain a detailed rationale. However, the April 2021 opinion discounted the Veteran's lay testimony in the absence of corroborating medical evidence and did not address the Veteran's endorsement of back pain at separation from service. Thus, neither opinion is wholly persuasive. Given these facts, the Board finds that the evidence is at least in equipoise as to whether the Veteran's cervical spine disability, to include cervical strain, is related to active service. Resolving reasonable doubt in the Veteran's favor, the Board finds that the Veteran's cervical strain originated during service. Accordingly, service connection for a cervical spine disability, to include cervical strain, is warranted. 38 U.S.C. § 5107(b); 38 C.F.R. § 3.102. DONNIE R. HACHEY Veterans Law Judge Board of Veterans' Appeals Attorney for the Board Pelican, Luke H. 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.