Citation Nr: 25005231 Decision Date: 04/17/25 Archive Date: 04/17/25 DOCKET NO. 19-11 068 DATE: April 17, 2025 REMANDED Entitlement to service connection for an acquired psychiatric disorder is remanded. Entitlement to service connection for a right knee disability is remanded. Entitlement to service connection for a left knee disability is remanded. REASONS FOR REMAND The Veteran served on active duty with the United States Army from December 1985 to July 1986. He had additional service with the Army National Guard until 2000. Most recently, the Board remanded these matters in October 2024 to the Agency of Original Jurisdiction (AOJ) for additional development. The appeal has since returned to the Board following a February 2025 Supplemental Statement of the Case (SSOC). A remand by the Board confers upon the Veteran, as a matter of law, the right to compliance with the remand instructions, and imposes upon VA a concomitant duty to ensure compliance with the terms of the remand. See Stegall v. West, 11 Vet. App. 268, 271 (1998). The Board finds that the AOJ did not substantially comply with the remand directives. The Board's October 2024 remand directives requested an addendum medical opinion that specifically addressed the bilateral knee pain the Veteran reported to experience during service. The directives did not require the Veteran undergo another VA examination. An exam scheduling request was created in November 2024 because of the Board's remand. The request explicitly stated that "[t]he Veteran does not need to report for all examinations" for his bilateral knee disability. However, the February 2025 SSOC denied entitlement to service connection for entitlement to a right knee disability, a left knee disability, and an acquired psychiatric disorder because the Veteran failed to report for his VA examination without showing good cause. Accordingly, an additional remand is required for an adequate medical opinion addressing the Veteran's bilateral knee disabilities. The Board notes that, in March 2023, a VA examiner opined it was at least as likely as not that the Veteran's bilateral knee disability caused his acquired psychiatric disorder. Thus, the Veteran's claim for entitlement to service connection for an acquired psychiatric disorder is inextricably intertwined with his remanded claims. See Harris v. Derwinski, 1 Vet. App. 180, 183 (1991) (issues are 'inextricably intertwined' when they are so closely tied together that a final Board decision cannot be rendered unless both are adjudicated). As such, this issue must also be remanded. The matters are REMANDED for the following action: 1. Obtain a VA medical opinion from an appropriate clinician identifying the likely etiology for the Veteran's diagnosed bilateral knee disability. The examiner must review the entire claims file. The Veteran should not be required to appear for a new VA examination. After reviewing the entire claims file, the examiner is asked to opine if it is at least as likely as not (likelihood is at least approximately balanced or nearly equal, if not higher) that the Veteran's bilateral knee disability was incurred or aggravated during his active service? Specifically, the examiner is asked to address the knee pain the Veteran reports experiencing during service in their rationale. The examiner is advised that the Veteran is competent to report his symptoms and history and that such reports must be acknowledged and considered in formulating any opinions. A clear explanation for all opinions would be helpful, and a discussion of the facts and medical principles involved would be of considerable assistance to the Board. If the examiner(s) is unable to provide an opinion, they should explain why. H.M. WALKER Veterans Law Judge Board of Veterans' Appeals Attorney for the Board S. Feistritzer, 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.