Citation Nr: 22018368 Decision Date: 03/29/22 Archive Date: 03/29/22 DOCKET NO. 17-46 426 DATE: March 29, 2022 ORDER Service connection for a lower back disability is denied. Service connection for a right knee disability is denied. Service connection for a left knee disability is denied. Service connection for left little finger injury residuals (left little finger disability) is denied. FINDINGS OF FACT 1. The Veteran's lower back disability was not shown in service, nor was arthritis shown within one year from service discharge, and a currently diagnosed lower back disability is not otherwise etiologically due to incident or injury during active military service. 2. The Veteran's right knee disability was not shown in service, nor was arthritis shown within one year from service discharge, and a currently diagnosed right knee disability is not etiologically due to incident or injury during active military service. 3. The Veteran's left knee disability was not shown in service, nor was arthritis shown within one year from service discharge, and a currently diagnosed left knee disability is not etiologically due to incident or injury during active military service. 4. The Veteran's left little finger disability was not shown in service, nor was arthritis of the joint shown within one year from service discharge, and a currently diagnosed left little finger disability is not etiologically due to incident or injury during active military service. CONCLUSIONS OF LAW 1. The criteria for service connection for a lower back disability have not been met. 38 U.S.C. §§ 1110, 1131, 5107; 38 C.F.R. §§ 3.102, 3.303. 2. The criteria for service connection for a right knee disability have not been met. 38 U.S.C. §§ 1110, 1131, 5107; 38 C.F.R. §§ 3.102, 3.303. 3. The criteria for service connection for a left knee disability have not been met. 38 U.S.C. §§ 1110, 1131, 5107; 38 C.F.R. §§ 3.102, 3.303. 4. The criteria for service connection for left little finger injury residuals have not been met. 38 U.S.C. §§ 1110, 1131, 5107; 38 C.F.R. §§ 3.102, 3.303. REASONS AND BASES FOR FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS The Veteran served on active duty in the United States Army Reserve from September 1981 to September 1984, and from November 1990 to July 1991. This matter comes before the Board of Veterans' Appeals (Board) from a December 2014 rating decision of the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Regional Office in San Diego, California. In September 2021, the Board remanded the case to the Regional Office for further evidentiary development. Service Connection Service connection may be granted for a disability resulting from a disease or injury incurred in, or aggravated during service. 38 U.S.C. § 1110; 38 C.F.R. § 3.303. That determination requires a finding of a current disability that is related to an injury or disease in service. Service connection may be granted for a disability diagnosed after discharge, when all the evidence, including that pertinent to service, establishes that the disability is due to disease or injury that was incurred or aggravated in service. 38 C.F.R. § 3.303(d). Generally, to establish service connection, there must be competent, credible evidence of (1) a current disability, (2) in-service incurrence or aggravation of an injury or disease, and (3) a nexus, or link, between the current disability and the in-service disease or injury. See, e.g., Davidson v. Shinseki, 581 F.3d 1313(Fed. Cir. 2009); Pond v. West, 12 Vet. App. 341 (1999). In support of his claims for service connection, the Veteran explained that during his active service, he experienced sharp pains while jumping off rail cars on his left knee and back pains; and that he dislocated his left little finger in basic training. See August 2014 Statement in Support of Claim. Pertinently, in asserting service connection for these disabilities, he also asserts that these conditions were also noted in his military service records. See December 2021 Form VA 9: Appeal to Board Form. However, service treatment records do not show that the Veteran had any complaints, treatment, diagnoses, or injuries that may be related to a low back, right knee, left knee or left little finger disability. On the contrary, they also show that he did receive medical treatments for various other conditions and ailments, thus the Board infers from this that the conditions were not present. Significantly, a post-deployment examination in 1991 did not reveal any reports or findings of any back, knee, or little finger condition. Moreover, during a periodic examination for Reserves in September 2003, the Veteran again denied any pertinent complaints of any joint or knee issues and likewise, none were found upon a physical examination. Although post-service treatment records reflect current diagnoses of lower back, bilateral knee, and left little finger disabilities, there is no indication that any of these disabilities are otherwise related to his active service, and the Veteran has not submitted any evidence, such as, for example, private treatment records from a period during his active service, or lay statements form fellow service members or other witnesses, to show or indicate that any of his current, above-mentioned disabilities are etiologically related to his active service. Despite his report of in-service injuries to the low back, bilateral knee and left little finger, as the Veteran, himself, even suggests, "[these] injuries [which] were suffered in training or during deployment" likely healed, see August 2014 Statement in Support of Claim, as they were not documented in his separation examination report or his report of medical history form upon separation from service. Further, even though he asserts that "they seem like they [reemerged and [became] a source of chronic pain", see August 2014 Statement in Support of Claim, there is no evidence that establishes a correlation between his current low back, bilateral knee or left little finger and his active military service. The Board acknowledges that the Veteran has not been afforded VA examinations for low back, bilateral knee, and left little finger conditions, for specific purposes of obtaining opinions on the nexus between these current disabilities and his service. However, there is no probative evidence of in-service conditions that may be related to low back, bilateral knee, or left little finger disabilities that were incurred in, and/or are related to his active service. Further, there is no indication that the Veteran's low back, bilateral knee, or left little finger disabilities were associated with his service or another service-connected disability. Therefore, the Board finds that a VA medical examination, for the specific purposes of obtaining a VA opinion, was not warranted under the duty to assist. See McLendon v. Nicholson, 20 Vet. App. 79, 83 (2006) (holding that an examination and medical nexus opinion is required for a service connection claim when there is evidence of current disability or persistent or recurrent symptoms of a disability, evidence establishing in-service event, injury, or disease, or a disease manifested in accordance with presumptive service connection regulations, and an indication that the current disability may be related to an in-service event, injury, or disease; but insufficient evidence to decide the claim). Thus, as the preponderance of the evidence is against these claims, service connection for the low back, bilateral knee, and left little finger disabilities must be denied. Gilbert v. Derwinski, 1 Vet. App. 49, 53 (1990); 38 U.S.C. § 5107; 38 C.F.R. § 3.102. M. Tenner Veterans Law Judge Board of Veterans' Appeals Attorney for the Board V-N. Pratt, 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.