Citation Nr: 22020007 Decision Date: 04/04/22 Archive Date: 04/04/22 DOCKET NO. 19-28 042 DATE: April 4, 2022 ORDER Service connection for a left knee disability is granted. Service connection for an anxiety disorder is granted. FINDINGS OF FACT 1. Resolving any reasonable doubt in favor of the Veteran, evidence persuasively shows the Veteran has diagnosed disability of his right knee which has been attributed to his service 2. Resolving reasonable doubt in favor of the Veteran, his anxiety disorder is etiologically due to his active military service. CONCLUSIONS OF LAW 1. The criteria for service connection for a left knee disability have been met. 38 U.S.C. §§ 1110, 1112, 1113, 1137, 5107; 38 C.F.R. §§ 3.102, 3.303. 2. The criteria for service connection for an anxiety disorder have been met. 38 U.S.C. §§ 1110, 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 from August 2000 to December 2004. This matter comes before the Board of Veterans' Appeals (Board) on appeal from a December 2017 rating decision. The Veteran testified before the undersigned Veterans Law Judge at a Board hearing in July 2020. A copy of the transcript is of record. Service Connection Service connection may be granted for disability resulting from disease or injury incurred in or aggravated by active service. 38 U.S.C. §§ 1110, 1131; 38 C.F.R. § 3.303. The three-element test for service connection requires evidence of: (1) a current disability; (2) in-service incurrence or aggravation of a disease or injury; and (3) a causal relationship between the current disability and the in-service disease or injury. Shedden v. Principi, 381 F.3d 1163, 1166-67 (Fed. Cir. 2004). Left Knee Disability The Veteran has a present disability of non-ossifying fibroma of the left knee and his service treatment records state that he suffered left knee pain as the result of a twisting injury in-service in April 2003. As such the Board finds that the Veteran meets the first two elements for service connection. Turning to the third element, the Veteran underwent a VA examination in November 2017. The VA examiner found that it was as likely than not that the Veteran's left knee nonossifying fibroma was caused by or a result of the left knee injury during service. The examiner's rationale was that after review of the medical records, interviewing and examining the Veteran, considering his statements as to his symptoms and history, it was more likely than not that the Veteran's left knee injury had its onset during service. Therefore, the examiner concluded that the current left knee disability is at least as likely as not due to the 2003 left knee injury. Accordingly, service connection for a left knee disability is granted. 38 C.F.R. § 3.310. Anxiety Disorder The Veteran asserts that he has a psychiatric disability which was caused or incurred in service. The Veteran underwent a VA examination in November 2017. The examiner found the Veteran to not meet the diagnostic criteria for a diagnosis of posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD). However, the examiner did find the Veteran to have a diagnosis of other specified anxiety disorder. Therefore, the first element of a service connection claim has been met. Further, the November 2017 examiner was asked to opine on the etiology of the Veteran's mental disability. The VA examiner found that the Veteran had experiences in the military that would meet the criteria for PTSD, however, he did not meet the other criteria necessary to render a diagnosis of PTSD. Therefore, the examiner found the appropriate diagnosis for the Veteran to be an other specified anxiety disorder. As this diagnosis was based on experiences of the Veteran while in the military, this shows a nexus between his current anxiety disorder and his military service. Given the above, the Board finds the evidence to be in favor of finding that the Veteran's anxiety disorder is the result his active duty service. The Board acknowledges that there is no indication of a documented psychiatric disability in service. However, the record contains a competent medical opinion which found a positive nexus between the Veteran's current disability and service. The Board finds that this opinion should be afforded significant probative value as the examiner reviewed and considered the evidence of record, conducted a thorough interview with the Veteran, and considered his statements regarding the history, onset, and nature of his psychiatric symptoms, and supported the opinion with a thorough and reasoned medical explanation with reference to reviewed literature. See Nieves-Rodriguez v. Peake, 22 Vet. App. 295, 302-04 (2008). (Continued on the next page) Therefore, resolving reasonable doubt in the Veteran's favor, the Board finds that his anxiety disorder is etiologically related to service and service connection is warranted. 38 U.S.C. § 5107(b); Gilbert v. Derwinski, 1 Vet. App. 49 (1990). JOHN Z. JONES Veterans Law Judge Board of Veterans' Appeals Attorney for the Board Jorge Barroso, 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.