Citation Nr: 23023907 Decision Date: 04/25/23 Archive Date: 04/25/23 DOCKET NO. 19-06 454 DATE: April 25, 2023 REMANDED The claim for a rating in excess of 10 percent for right knee limitation of flexion, claimed as right knee chondromalacia, is remanded. The claim for a rating in excess of 10 percent for left knee instability, claimed as chondromalacia, is remanded. REASONS FOR REMAND The Veteran served on active duty in the U.S. Marine Corps from January 1989 to September 1993. The matter is on appeal before the Board from a September 2018 rating decision. The Veteran provided testimony at a February 2022 Board hearing before the undersigned Veterans Law Judge. A transcript of the hearing is of record. The Board previously remanded the appeal in August 2022 for further development, specifically to provide the Veteran a VA examination because the evidence of record suggested that the Veteran's knee conditions may have worsened since he had last undergone a VA examination. Additionally, there was a question as to whether the Veteran's knee stability was consistent with the medical record, as he had not been found to have instability at either the 2018 or 2019 VA examinations, but his VA treatment record showed the Veteran to have very mild laxity in his right knee and mild to moderate laxity in his left knee. Furthermore, VA treatment records from 2018 showed the Veteran to have a mildly antalgic gate, to be issued a cane, and to have requested a stabilizing brace. The Veteran underwent VA examinations in both August and September 2022, unfortunately, the findings within each of the examinations are contradictory as to whether the Veteran does or does not have instability. On both the August and September 2022 VA examinations, under the section regarding joint stability, the VA examiner indicated the Veteran to have recurrent subluxation or persistent instability for both knees. He did not have a ligament tear (sprain) for either knee. The Veteran did require a prescription for a brace for both knees. He did not have recurrent patellar instability. Thus, based upon the joint stability section in both the August and September 2022 VA examinations, it appears that the Veteran currently has recurrent instability or subluxation with both knees. However, in the August 2022 VA examination under the remarks section, the VA examiner indicated that the Veteran did not have current joint instability, but that he did have a history of moderate recurrent subluxation and lateral instability for both knees. Under the remarks section in the September 2022 VA examination, the VA examiner indicated that the Veteran did not have current joint instability, and that he did not have a history of recurrent subluxation or lateral instability. Thus, based upon the remarks section, while the Veteran was indicated to have a history of recurrent subluxation and lateral instability for both knees on the August 2022 VA examination, in neither examination was he found to currently have recurrent instability or subluxation for either knee. The findings in the remarks section for both VA examinations contradict the findings in the joint stability section that the Veteran has recurrent subluxation or persistent instability for both knees. As such, with regard to stability, both the August 2022 VA examination and the September 2022 VA examination are inadequate, and therefore, remand is warranted to provide the Veteran with a new VA examination for purposes of clarification to determine whether the Veteran has joint instability. The matters are REMANDED for the following action: 1. Schedule the Veteran for a VA examination to determine the current severity of his bilateral knee conditions. (a.) The examiner should review the August 2022 Board remand decision, the Veterans testimony at the February 2022 Board hearing, and the August and September 2022 VA Knee examinations, and then provide a clarifying opinion as to whether the Veteran does or does not have recurrent subluxation or persistent instability with either knee, due to the contradictions found in the joint stability section and the remarks section. MATTHEW W. BLACKWELDER Veterans Law Judge Board of Veterans' Appeals Attorney for the Board S. Lutgens-Staley, 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.