Citation Nr: 23001097 Decision Date: 01/09/23 Archive Date: 01/09/23 DOCKET NO. 18-30 740 DATE: January 9, 2023 ORDER Entitlement to service connection for an injury to the right upper lip is granted. FINDING OF FACT The Veteran's injury to the right upper lip is related to an in-service injury, event, or disease. CONCLUSION OF LAW The criteria for service connection for injury to the right upper lip are met. 38 U.S.C. §§ 1131, 5107; 38 C.F.R. §§ 3.102, 3.303. REASONS AND BASES FOR FINDING AND CONCLUSION The Veteran served on active duty in the United States Navy from November 1976 to December 1980. This matter comes before the Board of Veterans' Appeals (Board) on appeal from a July 2017 rating decision issued by a Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Regional Office (RO). In June 2019, the Board remanded the matter to the Agency of Original Jurisdiction (AOJ) for additional development which included obtaining any outstanding treatment records and an addendum medical opinion. The Board finds that there was substantial compliance with the remand directives as treatment records were obtained and a July 2020 VA medical opinion was obtained that adequately addressed the nature and etiology of the Veteran's right upper lip injury. See Stegall v. West, 11 Vet. App. 268 (1998). 1. Service Connection for Injury to the Right Upper Lip Generally, to establish service connection, a claimant must show: (1) a present disability; (2) an in-service incurrence or aggravation of a disease or injury; and (3) a causal relationship between the present disability and the disease or injury incurred or aggravated during service, the so-called "nexus" requirement. See 38 U.S.C. §§ 1110, 1131; 38 C.F.R. § 3.303; see also Shedden v. Principi, 381 F.3d 1163, 1167 (Fed. Cir. 2004). The Veteran contends that his right upper lip injury was caused by his active duty service. He reported that he sustained an injury to his right upper lip while grabbing the line pulling a supply ship alongside the U.S.S. South Carolina where he was stationed. See January 2018 Notice of Disagreement, June 2018 Form 9. He explained that the towing line was dispersed at fast speeds with a leading edge of a large rubber ball that struck his right upper lip. Id. The Board concludes that the Veteran has a current disability that began during active service/is related to an in-service injury, event, or disease. 38 U.S.C. §§ 1110, 1131, 5107(b); Holton v. Shinseki, 557 F.3d 1363, 1366 (Fed. Cir. 2009); 38 C.F.R. § 3.303(a). A February 2018 VA examination show the Veteran has a current diagnosis of numbness and scar in the right upper lip. The remaining question is whether the current disability is related to service. During the February 2018 VA examination, the Veteran was interviewed by the examiner who also reviewed the pertinent medical history and performed an examination. In an opinion provided in July 2020 by the same examiner, the examiner opined that that the condition claimed by the Veteran was incurred in or caused by the claimed in-service injury, event, or illness. In support of this conclusion, the examiner noted that the Veteran had a scar on his face. The examiner explained that the scar was incurred during service when the Veteran had hit his face while he was catching a ball from a supply ship. His face was lacerated in the right upper lip, and he was stitched up. The Veteran has had numbness in the lacerated area since the injury. Thus, the examiner opined that it is likely that his injury to the right upper lip was related to an in-service injury, event, or disease. The Board finds this opinion highly probative as it was made by a medical professional with consideration of the specific facts in this case and after examination of the Veteran. There is no medical opinion or competent and credible evidence in significant conflict with the VA medical opinion. For the above reasons, the Board finds that the most persuasive evidence of record supports the claim, and service connection is granted. 38 U.S.C. § 5107; 38 C.F.R. § 3.102. D. Martz Ames Veterans Law Judge Board of Veterans' Appeals Attorney for the Board M. Mathew 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.