PERIPHERAL NERVE CONDITIONS

L. B. CRYAN · 2026 · Case ID: 26002163

DENIED

Summary

The veteran, who served in the Army from July 1985 to April 1993, appeals the denial of service connection for bilateral lower extremity radiculopathy, claimed as secondary to his service-connected lumbosacral strain. The veteran testified to experiencing bilateral leg pain, numbness, and tingling originating from his back, with onset around 2000 or more recently according to later statements. Service treatment records did not document treatment for or a diagnosis of radiculopathy. Multiple VA examinations were conducted. An initial examination in July 2012 noted some lumbar spasms and mild left foot drop, but subsequent examinations and imaging, including a July 2016 MRI, did not objectively confirm radiculopathy or nerve root compression. Later VA opinions, particularly from March 2022, October 2022, September 2025, and November 2025, consistently found no objective evidence of radiculopathy, deeming the Veteran's symptoms subjective and not meeting diagnostic criteria in the absence of objective findings. While one examiner in February 2025 speculated about potential causes, the Board found this opinion lacked probative value due to its speculative and conflicting nature. The Board ultimately concluded, based on the preponderance of the evidence and consistent unfavorable VA opinions, that the Veteran does not have a current diagnosis of radiculopathy and has not had one at any time relevant to the claim. Therefore, service connection for bilateral lower extremity radiculopathy was denied.

Rationale

No objective evidence of radiculopathy on examination or imaging.; Conflicting and speculative VA examiner opinions regarding etiology.; Veteran's subjective reports of pain and numbness not meeting diagnostic criteria.

Service Branch

ARMY

Special Benefit

NO SPECIAL BENEFIT

Docket No.

18-35 089

Full Decision Text

Citation Nr: 26002163
Decision Date: 02/17/26 Archive Date: 02/17/26

DOCKET NO. 18-35 089
DATE: February 17, 2026

ORDER

Entitlement to service connection for right and left lower extremity radiculopathy, to include as secondary to service-connected lumbosacral strain, is denied.

FINDINGS OF FACT

1. The evidence of record persuasively weighs against finding that the Veteran has had radiculopathy of the right and left extremities at any time during or approximate to the pendency of the claim.

2. The Veteran's reported bilateral lower extremity symptoms of pain, numbness, and/or tingling are productive of functional impairment that did not begin during active service and is not otherwise etiologically related to an in-service injury or disease to include his service-connected lumbosacral strain.

CONCLUSION OF LAW

The criteria for service connection for right and left lower extremity radiculopathy, to include as secondary to service-connected lumbosacral strain, have not been met. 38 U.S.C. §§ 1110, 1112, 1131, 5107; 38 C.F.R. §§ 3.102, 3.303, 3.307, 3.309, 3.310.

REASONS AND BASES FOR FINDINGS AND CONCLUSION

The appellant is a Veteran who served on active duty in the Army from July 1985 to April 1993. This case comes to the Board of Veterans' Appeals (Board) on appeal from a June 2017 rating decision of a Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Regional Office (RO), which determined that new and material evidence had not been received to reopen a previously denied claim of service connection for radiculopathy of the lower extremities. In July 2021, the Veteran testified before the undersigned at a Board virtual hearing. A January 2022 Board decision reopened the claim, after finding new and material evidence had been received, and remanded the case to the RO for further development of the claim on its merits. The Board again remanded the case to the RO in August 2022 for development.

A February 2023 Board decision denied service connection for bilateral lower extremity radiculopathy, and the Veteran appealed the decision to the United States Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims (CAVC). In an August 2023 Order, the CAVC granted an August 2023 Joint Motion for Remand (JMR) of the parties, thereby vacating the Board's February 2023 decision and remanding the matter to the RO for action consistent with the terms of the JMR. In December 2023 and June 2025, the Board remanded the case to the RO for further development of the claim. As the RO has continued to deny the claim, this (legacy) case has now been returned to the Board for its consideration.

Entitlement to service connection for right and left lower extremity radiculopathy, to include as secondary to service-connected lumbosacral strain

Service connection may be granted for a disability resulting from a disease or injury incurred in or aggravated by active service. See 38 U.S.C. §§ 1110, 1131; 38 C.F.R. § 3.303(a). To substantiate a claim of service connection there must be evidence of: (1) a current disability (for which service connection is sought); (2) incurrence or aggravation of a disease or injury in service; and (3) a nexus between the claimed disability and the disease or injury in service. See Shedden v, Principi, 381 F.3d 1153, 1166-1167 (Fed. Cir. 2004).

Service connection may be granted for any disease diagnosed after discharge, when all the evidence, including that pertinent to service, establishes that the disability was incurred in service. 38 C.F.R. § 3.303(d).

Where a chronic disease is shown as such in service, subsequent manifestations of the same chronic disease are generally service connected; if a chronic disease is noted in service but chronicity in service is not adequately supported, a showing of continuity of symptomatology after separation is required. 38 C.F.R. § 3.303(b). Entitlement to service connection based on chronicity or continuity of symptomatology pursuant to 38 C.F.R. § 3.303(b) applies only to a disease enumerated on the list of chronic diseases in 38 U.S.C. § 1101(3) or 38 C.F.R. § 3.309(a). Walker v. Shinseki, 708 F.3d 1331 (Fed. Cir. 2013). Organic disease of the nervous system is one such listed disease. In addition, such chronic disease is presumed to have been incurred in service if it manifested to a compensable degree within one year of separation from service. 38 U.S.C. §§ 1101(3), 1112(a)(1); 38 C.F.R. §§ 3.307(a), 3.309(a).

Service connection may also be granted for a disability that is caused, or aggravated by, service-connected disease or injury. 38 C.F.R. § 3.310(a), (b).

It is the defined and consistently applied policy of the Department of Veterans Affairs to administer the law under a broad interpretation, consistent, however, with the facts shown in every case. When, after careful consideration of all procurable and assembled data, a reasonable doubt arises regarding service origin, the degree of disability, or any other point, such doubt will be resolved in favor of the claimant. By reasonable doubt is meant one which exists because of an approximate balance of positive and negative evidence which does not satisfactorily prove or disprove the claim. 38 C.F.R. § 3.102

The question for the Board is whether the Veteran has a current disability that began during service, was manifest to a compensable degree within the one-year presumptive period, or is at least as likely as not related to an in-service injury, event, or disease, to include service-connected lumbosacral strain.

The Veteran contends that he has bilateral lower extremity radiculopathy that is related to his service-connected lumbosacral strain. At the July 2021 Board hearing, he testified that he began to experience bilateral leg pain originating from the back around the year 2000. He also testified that he currently experienced tingling and numbness in the back of the legs. On VA outpatient records in 2016, he reported lower back pain radiating to the legs for about five years. On an October 2022 VA examination, he reported the onset of his disability was six years earlier, and on the March 2025 VA examination, he stated the onset was early 2000.

The Veteran's claim seeking service connection for lower extremity radiculopathy ("nerves in back") was received in May 2013. Service treatment records (STRs) show no evidence of treatment for or a diagnosis of radiculopathy or the reported symptoms of pain, numbness, and tingling that the Veteran has attributed to radiculopathy.

After service, the Veteran underwent a VA Gulf War general medical examination in July 2012, and the only neurological impairment was from headaches. On a headache-specific examination at that time, an ancillary finding of left lumbar paraspinal spasms was noted with range of motion. The Veteran reported lumbar pain with radiation into the left posterior thigh and calf, but the examiner indicated that his sensation per a monofilament sensory assessment was intact in the lower extremities, even though the Veteran reported slightly less sensation in the left toe and lateral foot compared to the right side. He was noted to have a mild left foot drop against resistance, yet his gait was normal. The ancillary finding of lumbar muscle spasms was also associated with symptoms of radiculopathy and mild decrease in strength in the left lower extremity. However, there were no imaging studies or electromyography that accompanied the report to confirm the ancillary finding of radiculopathy symptoms. Furthermore, the monofilament assessment had not supported the finding, and the contemporaneous July 2012 Gulf War examination report showed no neurological or peripheral symptoms in the left extremity. In short, there is no objective evidence to corroborate the examiner's finding of radicular symptoms. Also, neither examination endorsed any functional impairment as a result of those reported symptoms. Accordingly, the 2012 headache examination
was normal. The ancillary finding of lumbar muscle spasms was also associated with symptoms of radiculopathy and mild decrease in strength in the left lower extremity. However, there were no imaging studies or electromyography that accompanied the report to confirm the ancillary finding of radiculopathy symptoms. Furthermore, the monofilament assessment had not supported the finding, and the contemporaneous July 2012 Gulf War examination report showed no neurological or peripheral symptoms in the left extremity. In short, there is no objective evidence to corroborate the examiner's finding of radicular symptoms. Also, neither examination endorsed any functional impairment as a result of those reported symptoms. Accordingly, the 2012 headache examination is of limited probative value.

VA treatment records from 2015 show that the Veteran was seen for left knee and foot complaints, which were revealed to be arthritis of the knee and gout in the left foot. On a July 2015 VA CBOC Attending Comprehensive Assessment, he had left knee pain but otherwise had no complaint of pain in the lower extremities. Neurological examination was unremarkable at that time. VA treatment records from 2016 show reports of pain, numbness and/or tingling in the lower extremities. In July 2016, the Veteran reported pain from his lower back to his legs for the past five years. He denied numbness but admitted to shooting pain. He indicated that he noticed it when going to the gym to exercise. The examination was unremarkable, and the assessment was lower back pain radiating to the left posterior thigh for five years. A private July 2016 MRI of the lumbar spine showed mild disc space narrowing and posterior annular bulging at L4-5; mild disc space narrowing without significant bulging herniation at L5-S1; multilevel disc desiccation; and no central canal stenosis, foraminal stenosis, or nerve root compression. In November 2016, at a VA health maintenance assessment, the Veteran continued to complain of pain in his back and left leg. A nursing progress note revealed about one week after the health maintenance assessment that the Veteran again reported pain in the lower back, with radiation to the right buttock and to the right thigh. He also reported that, "Sometimes feels like I cannot lift my left leg." His Ankle-Brachial Index (ABI) measurement was normal on the left side but abnormal on the right side, indicating calcified arteries, and he was prescribed high cholesterol medication and over-the-counter baby aspirin. An April 2017 VA outpatient note showed a diagnosis of periodic limb movement, restless leg syndrome, and sleep disorder. During this time, the Veteran denied radiation of his back pain. In April 2021, his diagnosis was plantar fasciitis, with an examination report showing all neurologic and motor testing was grossly intact.

On a March 2022 VA peripheral nerve examination, the Veteran reported a history of trauma (a motor vehicle accident and stepping into a hole) during service, from which he has had back pain ever since and has developed arm numbness. He did not describe any specific lower extremity symptoms at that time. On examination, muscle strength testing, reflexes, and sensation were all normal. The examiner indicated that, while the Veteran had current complaints of lower extremity symptoms consistent with radiculopathy, there were no objective findings of radiculopathy on examination. The examiner indicated that the in-service car accident could have caused the Veteran's back disability, which could have caused lower extremity pain. The examiner also opined that the general rigors of service could have caused the back disability, which in turn could have caused lower extremity radiculopathy. Subsequently, the examiner commented that the Veteran had an unremarkable lumbar spine X-ray in April 2022, which she stated was not a very sensitive tool as compared to an MRI in light of his symptoms. While the VA examiner's opinion contains inconclusive and speculative statements regarding the etiology of the Veteran's reported symptoms, it clearly indicates that there is no objective medical evidence to warrant a radiculopathy diagnosis based on the examination and review of the medical records. It is thus probative for the purpose of determining whether the Veteran has a current disability.

On an October 2022 VA peripheral nerve examination, the Veteran reported bilateral lower extremity numbness and pain onset six years earlier. His current symptoms were listed as occasional leg numbness. There were no symptoms attributable to any peripheral nerve condition noted. The examiner concluded that it was less likely than not that the Veteran's claimed bilateral lower extremity radiculopathy was incurred in or caused by service. The
clusive and speculative statements regarding the etiology of the Veteran's reported symptoms, it clearly indicates that there is no objective medical evidence to warrant a radiculopathy diagnosis based on the examination and review of the medical records. It is thus probative for the purpose of determining whether the Veteran has a current disability.

On an October 2022 VA peripheral nerve examination, the Veteran reported bilateral lower extremity numbness and pain onset six years earlier. His current symptoms were listed as occasional leg numbness. There were no symptoms attributable to any peripheral nerve condition noted. The examiner concluded that it was less likely than not that the Veteran's claimed bilateral lower extremity radiculopathy was incurred in or caused by service. The examiner indicated that although the Veteran reported bilateral lower extremity numbness and pain six years earlier, there was no objective evidence of a bilateral lower extremity neuropathy condition noted and that no diagnosis was warranted. The examiner further concluded that the claimed symptoms of leg pain did not cause any functional impairment as none was noted on the day of the examination.

In a December 2023 VA opinion, the examiner (the same physician from March 2022) stated in her review of the record that the Veteran did not have lower extremity radiculopathy and concluded that any currently diagnosed condition was less likely than not incurred in or caused by service. The remaining opinion was based on conjecture. She speculated that if the Veteran has bilateral lower extremity pain, it "may" be due to the same mechanical forces causing his lumbosacral strain because nerves leaving the spinal cord can be impinged upon, causing radiculopathy. She further speculated on trauma during service including a documented motor vehicle accident in June 1991 and the rigors of military training, stating that it "could have caused" a herniated disc or spondylolisthesis, which could put pressure on nerves exiting the spinal cord and result in radiculopathy.

However, in a February 2025 VA addendum opinion, the same examiner reversed herself and found, without identifying any corroborating medical study or report, that the Veteran had lower extremity radiculopathy. She furnished a favorable nexus opinion on a secondary service connection basis, stating that the Veteran has had bilateral leg pain dating back to 2000 which was most likely due to his back condition. She notably did not address the Veteran's conflicting statements (on 2016 VA treatment notes and the October 2022 VA examination report) that his bilateral lower extremity pain had onset more recently than 2000. She noted that he had a diagnosis of a contusion of the thoracic and lumbar spine in June 1991 and was service-connected with lumbosacral strain in 2016. She stated that the nerves exiting the spinal cord get impinged upon, causing bilateral lower extremity radiculopathy. Then, in confusing language, she concluded both that his bilateral lower extremity radiculopathy "is a direct cause of his service-connected lumbosacral strain spine disability" and that the lower extremity radiculopathy "is at least as likely as not... proximately due to or the result of" the service-connected lumbosacral strain. Given her speculative and conflicting conclusions that lack substantiation by any diagnostic imaging studies, the December 2023 and February 2025 opinions have limited, if any, probative value on the issue of current diagnosis and etiology.

On a March 2025 VA peripheral nerve examination, the Veteran reported the onset of numbness and tingling of the bilateral lower extremities in early 2000. He stated he had a history of a fall injury in service from which developed back pain and was now experiencing some numbness and tingling intermittently from the waist down to the knees. After the physical examination, the physician determined that the Veteran did not have a diagnosis of a peripheral nerve condition or peripheral neuropathy. He remarked that there was no clinical evidence of bilateral lower extremity peripheral neuropathy, finding that the Veteran's complaints were subjective only with a benign examination and unremarkable imaging.

In a September 2025 VA opinion, that same examining physician again found that the Veteran did not have a diagnosis of bilateral lower extremity radiculopathy. He stated that his physical examination and other VA examinations did not find any evidence of radiculopathy. In a November 2025 addendum opinion, he explained why his examination of the Veteran in March 2025 did not demonstrate the presence of radiculopathy, noting the findings that typically show radiculopathy and how it is typically diagnosed. He did find, however, that the Veteran as likely as not had a functional impairment that was based on his reported subjective bilateral lower extremity pain/radicular symptoms. He then opined that, in the absence of a diagnosis of radiculopathy or other disability, it was less likely than not that the Veteran's functional impairment was causally related to any specific injury or disease in service to include the service-connected lumbosacral strain. He noted that most cases of low back pain and associated lower extremity symptoms do not have a definable pathophysiological abnormality and are often termed nonspecific or functional. He stated that nonspecific lower extremity pain can cause significant activity limitation even in the absence of nerve root involvement, which was why the Veteran's reported symptoms did not appear implausible or inconsistent with medical knowledge (because pain and paresthesia may occur in the absence of true radiculopathy). He stated that, while lumbosacral strain can cause back pain and referred leg pain, the absence of objective findings precluded a diagnosis of radiculopathy, as well as service connection for functional impairment alone on a direct basis. He acknowledged the documented complaints and treatment for radicular symptoms in VA records in 2012 and 2016 but stated that the lack of objective findings on examination, images showing some form of spinal nerve impingement, and electrodiagnostic testing remained the most reliable basis for a diagnosis. He asserted that "musculoskeletal mimics and functional disorders" were common and must be differentiated from true radiculopathy, and that while the Veteran's symptoms might cause functional limitations, the current evidence did not support that he met the criteria for radiculopathy or a service-related neurological disability in the absence of objective findings.

The VA examiner concluded by acknowledging the Veteran's subjective reports of lower extremity pain and radicular symptoms and noted that they were consistent with the spectrum of symptoms seen in lumbosacral spine disorders. Nevertheless, his reported symptoms did not meet the criteria for a diagnosis of radiculopathy in the absence of objective findings such as dermatomal sensory loss, myotomal weakness, or diminished reflexes. He stated that functional impairment from pain was plausible and medically recognized but that a diagnosis of radiculopathy could not be rendered without supporting clinical or imaging evidence. He stated that he did not have to resort to speculation in giving his opinion.

Based on the following, the Board concludes that the Veteran does not have a current diagnosis of radiculopathy in the right and left lower extremities and has not had one at any time during the pendency of the claim or recent to the filing of the claim. Romanowsky v. Shinseki, 26 Vet. App. 289, 294 (2013); McClain v. Nicholson, 21 Vet. App. 319, 321 (2007). The September 2025 and November 2025 opinions of the VA examiner are considered probative as they are definitive (not grounded in speculation or contradictory findings), based upon a complete review of the Veteran's entire claims file, and supported by rationale. Moreover, they are consistent with the previous non-speculative VA opinions of record such as the March 2022 and October 2022 opinions. Of note, the MRI of the lumbar spine in July 2016 showed positive findings in regard to disc space narrowing and bulging, but it showed no central canal stenosis, foraminal stenosis, or nerve root compression. Examiners also found that an April 2022 lumbar spine X-ray did not reflect findings that were indicative of radiculopathy in the lower extremities. Also, the Veteran underwent a VA EMG/NCS of his left lower extremity in October 2024, and the report revealed it to be a normal study, without evidence for a myopathy, generalized large fiber polyneuropathy, left-sided lumbosacral radiculopathy. The Veteran has not furnished any competent medical evidence to contradict the opinions or otherwise diminish the probative weight of them.

In light of the foregoing, the evidence persuasively weighs against finding that the Veteran has had radiculopathy of the right
compression. Examiners also found that an April 2022 lumbar spine X-ray did not reflect findings that were indicative of radiculopathy in the lower extremities. Also, the Veteran underwent a VA EMG/NCS of his left lower extremity in October 2024, and the report revealed it to be a normal study, without evidence for a myopathy, generalized large fiber polyneuropathy, left-sided lumbosacral radiculopathy. The Veteran has not furnished any competent medical evidence to contradict the opinions or otherwise diminish the probative weight of them.

In light of the foregoing, the evidence persuasively weighs against finding that the Veteran has had radiculopathy of the right and left extremities at any time during or approximate to the pendency of the claim. Accordingly, there is no reasonable doubt to be resolved in his favor, and his claim must be denied. See 38 U.S.C. § 5107(b); 38 C.F.R. § 3.102; see also Brammer v. Derwinski, 3 Vet. App. 223 (1992).

Notwithstanding the lack of a diagnosis of radiculopathy in the lower extremities, the Veteran's reports with respect to experiencing symptoms of bilateral leg numbness and pain may be considered a disability, but only if the symptoms cause functional impairment. The term "disability" as used in 38 U.S.C. § 1110 "refers to the functional impairment of earning capacity, not the underlaying cause of said disability," and that "pain alone can serve as a functional impairment and therefore qualify as a disability." Saunders v. Wilkie, 886 F.3d 1356, 1363-64 (Fed. Cir. 2018). In other words, service connection may be warranted for pain causing functional impairment without a current diagnosis of a particular disability.

While the October 2022 VA examiner concluded that the Veteran's claimed lower extremity symptoms were subjective and not productive of functional impairment, the VA examiner in the November 2025 opinion determined that the Veteran did have functional impairment. Therefore, the Board turns to the next inquiry, which is whether the Veteran's bilateral lower extremity neurological disability characterized by subjective symptoms began during service, was manifest to a compensable degree within the one-year presumptive period, or is at least as likely as not related to an in-service injury, event, or disease, to include the service-connected lumbosacral strain. After reviewing the evidence for the period on appeal, the evidence of record persuasively weighs against the Veteran's claim.

As related previously, there is no evidence in the STRs or records shortly after discharge from service to indicate a bilateral lower extremity neurological disability. Therefore, on the basis of the service treatment records alone, service connection for the subjective neurological symptoms under 38 U.S.C. §§ 1110, 1131 and 38 C.F.R. § 3.303(a), based on inception in service, and under 38 U.S.C. § 1112 and 38 C.F.R. §§ 3.307(a) and 3.309(a), based on presumed incurrence in service, is not warranted. Further, the Veteran has provided conflicting accounts as to when his bilateral lower extremity neurological symptoms had onset. On some reports, he has said it was as early as 2000, with pain originating in his low back disability at that time. In any case, he has not alleged bilateral lower extremity neurological symptoms ever since service, so establishing service connection based on chronicity and continuity of symptomatology (38 C.F.R. § 3.303(b)) is not warranted.

Notwithstanding the foregoing, service connection may still be granted on a direct basis under 38 C.F.R. § 3.303(d), if the evidence shows that the claimed disability, which was first diagnosed more than a year after active service, was etiologically related to disease or injury in service. Service connection may also still be granted on a secondary basis under 38 C.F.R. § 3.310, if the evidence shows that the claimed disability was etiologically related to service-connected disability. It is the secondary service connection theory of entitlement that the Veteran specifically contends is favorable to his claim.

The VA examiner in November 2025 addressed these questions, opining that it was less likely than not that the Veteran's current functional impairment from bilateral lower extremity pain/radicular symptoms was related to any specific injury or disease during service, to include the service-connected lumbosacral strain. He explained the absence of objective findings precluded a diagnosis of radiculopathy (indicative of a causal link between the lumbosacral spine disability and lower extremity neurological symptoms) and direct service connection for functional impairment alone. He considered the Veteran's lay reports concerning his lower extremity symptoms, deeming them plausible because nonspecific lower extremity pain or functional impairment from pain/radicular symptoms can arise from musculoskeletal sources or functional disorders that do not implicate nerve root involvement (i.e., radiculopathy). His assessment is consistent with the finding of the October 2022 VA examiner who determined that the Veteran's subjective lower extremity pain was of unknown etiology. In short, he validated the Veteran's reports of lower extremity pain and radicular symptoms but found the symptoms to be nonspecific and distinct from any true radiculopathy that would stem from the Veteran's service-connected lumbosacral spine disability. He also did not find evidence that the Veteran's current subjective lower extremity symptoms productive of functional impairment were directly related to service.

The VA examiner's opinion that addressed both direct and secondary service connection theories of entitlement is by a medical professional who is competent to provide such an opinion. He furnished rationale that reflects familiarity with the Veteran's allegations regarding his current lower extremity neurological symptoms, the claims file, and his medical history. He also cited factual data and referred to supportive medical principles. Nieves-Rodriguez v. Peake, 22 Vet. App. 295 (2008); Barr v. Nicholson, 21 Vet. App. 303 (2007); Stefl v. Nicholson, 21 Vet. App. 120 (2007); Prejean v. West, 13 Vet. App. 444 (2000). As such, the VA examiner's opinion has great probative value.

The Veteran sincerely believes that his reported symptoms represent a bilateral lower extremity radiculopathy diagnosis that is related to his service-connected lumbosacral strain. While he is certainly competent to report his observable symptoms of leg pain, numbness, tingling, etc., he is not competent to provide a diagnosis or nexus opinion because a determination as to the diagnosis and cause of his symptoms is beyond the scope of a lay person. He does not have medical expertise to know whether his symptoms are related to a peripheral nerve diagnosis or to provide an opinion on causation. The issue is medically complex, as it requires specialized medical education and knowledge of the ability to interpret complicated diagnostic medical testing and of the pathophysiological relationship between the lumbosacral spine and the lower extremities. Jandreau v. Nicholson, 492 F.3d 1372, 1377 n.4 (Fed. Cir. 2007). As such, the Veteran's lay statements, even if credible, are not probative as to a diagnosis or causation in this case.

As the evidence of record persuasively weighs against the Veteran's claim of service connection for right and left lower extremity radiculopathy, on both a direct basis and a secondary basis, the benefit-of-the-doubt standard of proof does not apply, and the appeal in the matter must be denied. 38 U.S.C. § 5107; 38 C.F.R. §§ 3.102, 4.3; Lynch v. McDonough, 21 F.4th 776 (Fed. Cir. 2021) (en banc).

L. B. CRYAN

Veterans Law Judge

Board of Veterans' Appeals

Attorney for the Board Breitbeil, Debbie

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.

Analyze in VA Law Explorer