Citation Nr: 21041629 Decision Date: 07/09/21 Archive Date: 07/09/21 DOCKET NO. 17-59 337 DATE: July 9, 2021 REMANDED Entitlement to service connection for right lower extremity lymphedema is remanded. Entitlement to service connection for left lower extremity lymphedema is remanded. Entitlement to total disability due to individual unemployability (TDIU) is remanded. REASONS FOR REMAND The Veteran had active duty service with the U.S. Army from October 1968 to May 1970. This case comes before the Board of Veteran's Appeals (Board) on appeal from a March 2015 rating decision of the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Regional Office (RO). In June 2019 decision, the Board denied service connection for right and left lower extremity lymphedema and TDIU. The Veteran appealed the Board's decision to the United States Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims (Court). In accordance with a May 2021 Joint Motion for Partial Remand (JMPR), the Court vacated, in part, and remanded the June 2019 decision. The Court found that the Board erred in finding the VA satisfied its duty to assist, specifically, in failing to obtain an adequate medical opinion. Additionally, the Board erred when it did not provide an adequate statement or reasons or bases for its conclusions regarding the issue of TDIU. VA provided examinations in March 2015 and 2017, in which the examiners provided negative nexus opinions. The March 2015 examiner opined that the Veteran's lymphedema was less likely as not caused by or related to diabetes mellitus, type II, (DM) because the Veteran reported it developed in the summer of 2014. CAVC found that the examiner failed to provide a sufficiently detailed explanation for his conclusion. Further, the examiner failed to provide an opinion regarding whether the Veteran's service-connected DM aggravated his lymphedema. The March 2017 examiner opined that the lymphedema was less likely as not caused by, a result of, or permanently aggravated beyond natural progression by his service-connected DM. However, permanent aggravation was not required. CAVC found that the examiner failed to provide a sufficiently detailed explanation for his conclusion. The parties agreed that on remand, the Board shall ensure that VA obtain an examination or medical opinion that adequately discussed the Veteran's lay statements and address whether his lymphedema of the bilateral lower extremities was proximately due to, or aggravated by, a service-connected disability. TDIU The Veteran's TDIU claim is inextricably intertwined with the service connection claims being remanded herein, as the outcome of such may impact the TDIU claim. See Harris v. Derwinski, 1 Vet. App. 180, 183 (1991) (holding that where a decision on one issue would have a "significant impact" upon another, and that impact in turn could render any appellate review on the other claim meaningless and a waste of judicial resources, the two claims are inextricably intertwined). The matters are REMANDED for the following action: 1. Schedule the Veteran for a VA examination. The claims folder must be reviewed in conjunction with the examination. The examiner must opine as to whether it is at least as likely as not that the Veteran's bilateral lower extremity lymphedema was caused or aggravated by service or a service-connected disability. The examiner must address the Veteran's lay statements and discuss the role, if any, of DM in the onset or severity of lymphedema. A full rationale must be provided for any opinion reached. 2. Then, readjudicate the issues on appeal, including the inextricably intertwined issue of TDIU. If the benefits sought remain denied, issue a Supplemental Statement of the Case and provide an opportunity to respond. If necessary, return the case to the Board for further appellate review. WILLIAM H. DONNELLY Veterans Law Judge Board of Veterans' Appeals Attorney for the Board S. Baxter 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.