Knee decisions — 2017

The case is being remanded for additional development to ensure that the Veteran's VA examinations comply with the requirements of Correia v. McDonald, and to obtain any outstanding VA treatment records.

The Veteran's right shoulder and left knee disabilities have been found to be service-connected.,Service connection for a respiratory disability, claimed as asthma, is not established.

The Veteran's appeal is remanded due to the need for additional development, including a new examination and consideration of all relevant evidence.

The Board has remanded the case for additional development, including obtaining service treatment records and scheduling VA examinations. The Veteran's claims for service connection will be reconsidered based on the new evidence.

The Veteran's claim for automobile allowance is being remanded due to the need for a VA examination to assess his current functional impairment of hands and feet.

The Board has determined that the Veteran's right total knee replacement is service-connected as it is a progression of his pre-existing right knee disability, which was aggravated by military service.

[object Object],[object Object]

The Board found that the Veteran's current bilateral knee and hearing loss conditions do not meet the criteria for service connection, as there is no evidence of an in-service injury or disease related to these conditions. The Veteran's hearing loss was rated noncompensable throughout the appeal period.

The Veteran's right ankle disorder is not shown to be related to service, and the Board finds that the preponderance of the evidence is against the claim.,VA examination revealed no current right or left knee disability. The Veteran reported pain in service but there was no medical record documentation until 2011.

The Veteran's right total knee replacement is currently rated at 30 percent, and the evidence does not support a higher rating.

The Board has granted service connection for PTSD with major depressive disorder. The claims for knee and hip conditions are remanded due to the need for further development.

The Board has dismissed the appeal of entitlement to a 10 percent evaluation based on multiple noncompensable service-connected disabilities as moot due to the grant of compensable evaluations for the Veteran's knee disabilities and scars.

The Board has determined that new and material evidence has been received to reopen the claim of service connection for a left knee disability. With reasonable doubt resolved in favor of the Veteran, the criteria for entitlement to service connection for a left knee disability are met.

The Veteran's appeal is being remanded for additional development, including new VA examinations and the retrieval of outstanding medical records. The issues include increased evaluations for his lumbar spine and right knee disabilities, as well as service connection for a left knee disorder.

The Veteran's claim for service connection for a psychiatric disability was reopened and granted effective January 29, 2010.,Effective January 29, 2010, the Veteran is awarded a 10 percent rating for osteoarthritis with chondromalacia patella of both knees.

The Board is remanding the case to reschedule a video conference hearing for the Veteran regarding his claim of reopening service connection for a right knee condition.

The Veteran's claims of entitlement to service connection for various conditions, including degenerative disc disease of the lumbar and cervical spines, arthralgia of the right knee, peripheral artery disease, and hypertension have all been denied. The Board found that there is no evidence linking these conditions to his military service.

The Veteran's service-connected disabilities, including his back disability, right hip disability, left knee disability, left hip disability, and left foot disability, rendered him unable to secure or follow substantially gainful employment. The Board found that the criteria for a TDIU were met.

The Veteran's claims for PTSD and right knee disabilities were granted with effective dates of August 11, 2006. The claim for TDIU was not addressed in the decision.