Citation Nr: 22014198 Decision Date: 03/11/22 Archive Date: 03/11/22 DOCKET NO. 15-04 675 DATE: March 11, 2022 REMANDED The appeal for an initial rating in excess of 10 percent for service-connected left wrist disability is remanded. The appeal for an initial rating in excess of 10 percent for service-connected chronic left 2nd finger strain is remanded. The appeal for an initial rating in excess of 10 percent for service-connected chronic left 3rd finger strain is remanded. The appeal for an initial compensable rating for service-connected chronic left 4th finger strain is remanded. The appeal for an initial compensable rating for service-connected chronic left 5th finger strain is remanded. REASONS FOR REMAND The Veteran served on active duty in the Army from November 1992 to May 1993, and from January 2012 and October 2012. These matters were previously remanded by the Board in November 2018 and July 2021. Regrettably, another remand is necessary prior to readjudication of the claims. 1. Entitlement to an initial rating in excess of 10 percent for service-connected left wrist disability. 2. Entitlement to an initial rating in excess of 10 percent for service-connected chronic left 2nd finger strain. 3. Entitlement to an initial rating in excess of 10 percent for service-connected chronic left 3rd finger strain. 4. Entitlement to an initial compensable rating for service-connected chronic left 4th finger strain. 5. Entitlement to an initial compensable rating for service-connected chronic left 5th finger strain. In accordance with the July 2021 Remand, the Veteran was provided with a VA examination in November 2021 to address the severity of the Veteran's left wrist and finger disabilities. During the examination, the Veteran reported experiencing flare-ups. Unfortunately, the VA examiner did not offer an estimate of the Veteran's range of motion during a flare-up or following repeated use over time. The AOJ attempted to obtain an addendum opinion from the examiner. In the subsequent November 2021 addendum opinion, the examiner simply noted that the Veteran did not have significant limitation of functional ability in terms of additional loss of range of motion or gap in fingers. However, the examiner was asked to provide an estimate in terms of degrees as to the Veteran's range of motion during a flare-up or following repeated use over time. The Veteran's representative has raised the issue of the report being inadequate with respect to estimation regarding flare-ups. The Board observes that the VA examiner's addendum opinion that there was no "significant" limitation of functional ability in terms of limitation of motion during a flare-up indicates that there may have been some limitation otherwise, the examiner would have clearly stated that there was no additional limitation of motion. As the Board is not permitted to apply its own medical judgment, with respect to a determination regarding range of motion during a flare-up or following repeated use over time, further clarification is required. See Colvin v. Derwinski, 1 Vet. App. 171 (1991). Further, the Veteran's representative has also raised a question as to whether the November 2021 VA examiner was competent to conduct the examination and requested a copy of the November 2021 VA examiner's curriculum vitae. See February 2022 Informal Hearing Presentation. VA has a duty to assist in providing an examiner's curriculum vitae when requested by the Veteran or his representative. In Francway v. Wilkie, the Federal Circuit held that "[o]nce the request is made for information as to the competency of the examiner, the veteran has the right, absent unusual circumstances, to the curriculum vitae and other information about qualifications of a medical examiner," "mandated by VA's duty to assist." 940 F.3d 1304, 1308 (2019). While on remand, any outstanding VA treatment records should also be obtained and associated with the file. The matters are REMANDED for the following action: 1. Obtain any outstanding VA treatment records dated from April 2018. 2. Provide a copy of the November 2021 VA examiner's curriculum vitae to the Veteran and his representative. 3. Following completion of items 1 and 2, obtain a VA addendum opinion regarding the severity of the left wrist and finger disabilities. Following complete review of the record, the examiner must offer estimated range of motion measurements for the left wrist and each of the left fingers during a flare-up or following repeated use over time. If the examiner cannot express an estimation as to any loss of function in terms of degrees without resorting to speculation, he/she must explain the basis for his/her conclusion that a non-speculative opinion cannot be offered. The Board leaves it to the discretion of the examiner to indicate whether another physical examination is necessary in order to form an opinion. The examiner must provide a complete rationale for any opinion given. 4. Readjudicate the claims. Hannah Fisher Acting Veterans Law Judge Board of Veterans' Appeals Attorney for the Board Donna D. Ebaugh, 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.