Citation Nr: 22045926 Decision Date: 08/12/22 Archive Date: 08/12/22 DOCKET NO. 18-17 860 DATE: August 12, 2022 REMANDED Entitlement to service connection for a left wrist disorder, to include as due to service-connected right wrist disorder, is remanded. REASONS FOR REMAND The Veteran served on active duty from January 1984 to March 1990. In February 2020, a Board hearing was held before the undersigned Veterans Law Judge. A transcript is of record. In a decision issued in April 2020, the Board, in pertinent part, denied service connection for a left wrist disorder. The Veteran appealed that decision to the United States Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims (Court). In January 2022, the Court issued a Memorandum Decision vacating the Board's April 2020 decision and remanded the matter on appeal for adjudication consistent with the instructions outlined in the Memorandum Decision. Entitlement to service connection for a left wrist disorder, to include as due to service-connected right wrist disorder is remanded. In the January 2022 Memorandum Decision, the Board was instructed to discuss whether the Veteran's testimony possibly indicated a connection between the Veteran's left and right wrist disorders, to determine whether a medical opinion was required in this case. At the February 2020 Board hearing, the Veteran testified that his left wrist caused pain, swelling, numbness, and tingling. The Veteran also testified that his left wrist disorder began as a result of compensating for his service-connected right wrist disorder. Consistent with the January 2022 Memorandum Decision above, the Board finds that such evidence is sufficient to trigger VA's duty to assist to provide a VA examination and medical opinion to address secondary service connection. See McLendon v. Nicholson, 20 Vet. App. 79, 81-84 (2006). Accordingly, remand is warranted for additional development consistent with the directives herein. The matter is REMANDED for the following action: Schedule the Veteran for a VA examination and medical opinion with an appropriate examiner to evaluate the etiology of the Veteran's left wrist disorder. The claims folder (including a copy of this remand) must be provided to, and reviewed by, the examiner as part of the examination. All indicated tests should be accomplished, and all clinical findings should be reported in detail. a) The examiner should provide a current diagnosis for any left wrist disorder. The examiner is reminded that pain that causes functional impairment of earning capacity may constitute a disability even if there is no formal diagnosis. b) The examiner should opine as to whether it is at least as likely as not (i.e., 50 percent probability or greater) that the Veteran's left wrist disorder was caused or aggravated by his service-connected right wrist disorder. Aggravation in the secondary service connection context is defined as any increase in disability. In rendering the above opinion, the examiner should consider and discuss the February 2020 Board hearing testimony wherein the Veteran claimed his left wrist symptoms were the result of compensating for his right wrist disorder. The examiner is advised that the Veteran is competent to report his symptoms/history and that such reports must be acknowledged and considered in formulating any opinion. If his reports are discounted, the examiner should provide a reason for doing so. A rationale for all requested opinions shall be provided. If the examiner cannot provide an opinion without resorting to mere speculation, he or she shall provide a complete explanation stating why this is so. In so doing, the examiner shall explain whether the inability to provide a more definitive opinion is the result of a need for additional information or that he or she has exhausted the limits of current medical knowledge in providing an answer to that particular question. A. ISHIZAWAR Veterans Law Judge Board of Veterans' Appeals Attorney for the Board Metzner, Paul 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.