Knee decisions — 2020

The Board denied the Veteran's claim for TDIU prior to May 7, 2020, finding that his service-connected disabilities do not prevent him from obtaining or retaining substantially gainful employment.

The Board has remanded the case due to a lack of substantial compliance with previous remands. A supplemental VA opinion is needed regarding the etiology of any right knee disorder.

The Veteran's claim for a higher rating for his right knee degenerative joint disease was denied as the evidence did not support a rating in excess of 10 percent.

The Veteran's PTSD resulted in significant occupational and social impairment, warranting a 70% rating prior to April 26, 2017. The other issues on appeal were remanded for further development.

The Board dismissed the appeals for service connection of a right knee disorder and a skin disorder due to the death of the appellant.

The Veteran's right ankle tendinitis is granted a 20 percent rating from February 22, 2010.,The Veteran’s left knee disability and instability are both rated at 10 percent since February 22, 2010.

The Veteran's left knee arthritis and instability were granted a combined rating of 30 percent from September 1, 2018, to September 23, 2019. A 60 percent rating was granted thereafter under DC 5055.

The Board has determined that the Veteran's current right knee disability was aggravated by his active duty service, and thus grants service connection for this condition.

The Veteran's service-connected left knee disability is currently rated at 10 percent, but does not meet the criteria for a higher rating. The Veteran's tinnitus is also rated at 10 percent and no higher rating is warranted.

The Board has remanded the Veteran's claims for service connection for right and left knee conditions due to conflicting opinions on whether her PTSD symptoms caused her accidents resulting in these injuries.

The Veteran's hypertension and left knee disability are granted service connection, while the claim for a compensable rating for bilateral tinea pedis is denied.

The appeal for service connection of a psychiatric disorder is dismissed. The remaining issues related to left knee, right knee, left wrist, right wrist, lumbar spine, left foot, and right foot disorders are remanded.

The Board has remanded the Veteran's claims for service connection for left knee and low back disabilities due to inadequate medical opinions in previous examinations. The claims are now pending for further review.

The Veteran's claims for increased ratings and service connection have been denied. The right knee bursitis and bilateral tinnitus cases are denied, while the other issues on appeal remain pending.

The Board has remanded the cases for further development and an opinion regarding the etiology of the Veteran's claimed left elbow cubital tunnel syndrome and left knee patellofemoral syndrome.

The Board has denied service connection for diabetes mellitus and remanded the cases of left knee, right knee, lumbar spine, and sleep apnea disabilities due to lack of in-service onset or relationship.

The Board denied the Veteran's claims for an effective date earlier than July 27, 2012 for the grant of TDIU and DEA benefits. The Veteran was found to have met the criteria for eligibility for schedular consideration of TDIU since March 26, 2011, but his unemployability due to service-connected disabilities began in March 2011 if not sooner, which is more than one year prior to the filing of the TDIU application. As such, an earlier effective date for TDIU cannot be awarded.

The Board denied service connection for a right knee disorder and a right shoulder disorder, finding that the evidence did not support the Veteran's contentions of in-service injury or disease. The disorders were first diagnosed many years after service.

The Veteran's claims for increased ratings of his right and left knee disabilities, as well as a lumbar spine disability prior to December 14, 2015, were denied by the Board. The appeals are based on total bilateral knee replacements.

The Board has determined that additional VA opinions are necessary to address the nature and etiology of the Veteran’s claimed disabilities. The appeal is being remanded for further development.