Knee decisions — 2017

The Board has determined that the evidence is in equipoise as to whether the Veteran's right and left knee disabilities are at least as likely as not etiologically related to his active service. Therefore, the claim for service connection for a bilateral knee disability is granted.

The Veteran's claims for increased ratings for his service-connected bilateral knee disabilities are being remanded due to the need for additional development and examination.

The Veteran's appeal is being remanded for additional development of his claims, including obtaining updated contact information and scheduling VA examinations.

The Board has remanded the case due to inadequate reasons for denying separate evaluations for left and right knee instability. The Veteran is required to provide updated VA treatment records, undergo a VA examination, and have their claims reassessed.

The Veteran's claim for a higher rating for his service-connected left knee strain is remanded due to the need for additional development, including obtaining updated VA treatment records and scheduling an appropriate VA examination. The Veteran's right foot disability has already been rated as high as possible under VA regulations.

The Board has determined that additional development is needed to determine the nature and etiology of the Veteran's claimed disabilities, including whether they are related to service. The case will be remanded for a new VA examination.

The Veteran's appeal is being remanded to obtain additional medical records, determine the current severity of his knee disabilities and TDIU claim, and provide appropriate VA examinations.

The Veteran's right lower extremity radiculopathy was granted effective from April 4, 2014. The claim for service connection is now considered substantiated.

The Veteran's appeal is being remanded due to the need for additional development, including obtaining medical records from the Massachusetts Treatment Center in Bridgewater, MA. The case will be returned to the Board for further review.

The Board denied the Veteran's claims for service connection for left knee, right knee, low back, and bilateral hip disorders. The decision found that the pre-existing Baker's cyst of the left knee was not aggravated by active service.

The Veteran's PTSD claim is denied as there is no current diagnosis of PTSD.,Service connection for a low back disability is denied as the evidence does not show that it had onset in service or is otherwise related to active duty.

The Veteran's hypertension, right knee DJD, and RLS remain on appeal. The Board has determined that new examinations are needed to comply with the prior remand orders.

The Board has found that the Veteran's bilateral knee chondromalacia was caused by his service-connected bilateral pes planus with plantar fasciitis, and therefore grants the claim for service connection.

The Veteran's appeal is being remanded for further development, including obtaining updated VA examination results and addressing the service connection claims.

The Veteran does not have a current left ankle disability. The VA examiner found no evidence of a chronic condition prior to 2009 in his post-service treatment records, and the Veteran's lay statements regarding continuity of symptomatology were not considered until after the January 2010 VA examination.

The Veteran's claims for increased ratings and TDIU were denied. The Board found that the evidence did not support a higher rating for his lumbar spine disability, radiculopathy of the lower extremities, or knee disabilities during any portion of the appeal period.

The Veteran's claims for service connection for traumatic brain injury and arthritis of the back, knees, and fingers have been denied as there is no evidence linking these conditions to his military service.

The Board has granted an effective date of April 21, 2011 for the grant of service connection for instability of both knees. The Veteran is now entitled to a 10 percent rating for each knee since that date.

The Board has determined that additional development is needed for the Veteran's claims, including obtaining his service treatment records and VA examination reports. The case will be remanded to the AOJ for further action.

The Board has determined that the Veteran's collapsed lung was not caused by VA-prescribed medication, and therefore compensation pursuant to 38 U.S.C. § 1151 is denied.