DEGENERATIVE ARTHRITIS OF THE SPINE (SPONDYLOSIS)

Summary

The Veteran, who served in the U.S. Army from January 2023 to April 2024, appeals decisions denying service connection for left-side mallet finger and degenerative disc disease with lumbosacral strain and scoliosis. The claim for degenerative disc disease was denied in December 2024, with the agency of original jurisdiction (AOJ) finding that new evidence submitted in January 2025 was not relevant. The Board reviewed the case under the Appeals Modernization Act (AMA) and agreed that the January 2025 evidence, while new, did not tend to prove or disprove a matter at issue, as the prior decision already considered the existing diagnosis. Therefore, readjudication was denied. For the left-side mallet finger claim, the Veteran reported an in-service injury and subsequent field training trauma. Service treatment records reflected a prior diagnosis, but a March 2024 note indicated full extension and no mallet deformity. A radiology report in August 2024 found no significant abnormalities. A VA examination in August 2024 also found a normal left side, normal range of motion, and no pain. The Board afforded significant weight to the VA examination, finding the Veteran did not have a current disability for which compensation may be granted, and thus denied service connection for the mallet finger.

Rationale

New evidence submitted after prior decision was not relevant; Did not tend to prove or disprove matter at issue; Prior decision considered existing diagnosis

Full Decision Text

Citation Nr: A26039632
Decision Date: 04/28/26	Archive Date: 04/28/26

DOCKET NO. 250512-545300
DATE: April 28, 2026

ORDER

New and relevant evidence has not been received to readjudicate the previously denied claim seeking entitlement to service connection for degenerative disc disease with lumbosacral strain and scoliosis.

Entitlement to service connection for left-side mallet finger is denied.

FINDINGS OF FACT

1. Entitlement to service connection for degenerative disc disease with lumbosacral strain and scoliosis was denied in a December 2024 rating decision. 

2. Evidence received since the December 2024 rating decision is new but does not tend to prove or disprove a matter at issue in the claim.

3. The Veteran does not have a current diagnosis of left-side mallet finger. 

CONCLUSIONS OF LAW

1. The criteria for readjudication of entitlement to service connection for degenerative disc disease with lumbosacral strain and scoliosis have not been met. 38 U.S.C. § 5108; 38 C.F.R. § 3.156(d). 

2. The criteria for entitlement to service connection for left-side mallet finger have not been met. 38 U.S.C. §§ 1110, 5107; 38 C.F.R. §§ 3.102, 3.303, 3.304.

REASONS AND BASES FOR FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS

The Veteran served in the U.S. Army from January 2023 to April 2024.

This case is being reviewed according to the appellate process set forth under the Appeals Modernization Act (AMA). 38 C.F.R. § 19.2. The AMA or modernized review system applies to all claims, requests for reopening of finally adjudicated claims, and requests for revision based on clear and unmistakable error for which VA issues notice of an initial decision on or after February 19, 2019, the effective date of the modernized review system. See 38 C.F.R. § 3.2400.

This matter comes before the Board of Veterans' Appeals (Board) following decisions issued in September 2024 and April 2025 by the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Regional Office (RO). The September 2024 decision denied entitlement to service connection for left-side mallet finger. The April 2025 decision denied entitlement to service connection for degenerative disc disease with lumbosacral strain and scoliosis.

The Veteran initiated her claims in May 2024 and the September 2024 decision denied entitlement to service connection for left-side mallet finger and deferred a decision regarding service connection for degenerative disc disease with lumbosacral strain and scoliosis. A December 2024 decision denied service connection for degenerative disc disease with lumbosacral strain and scoliosis. 

In January 2025, the Veteran submitted a VA Form 20-0995, Decision Review Request: Supplemental Claim, and requested readjudication of entitlement to service connection for degenerative disc disease with lumbosacral strain and scoliosis, previously claimed as spinal arthritis most recently addressed in a December 2024 rating decision.  In April 2025, the agency of original jurisdiction (AOJ) issued the supplemental claim decision on appeal, which found that new and relevant evidence had not been received.  Therefore, the Board must determine whether new and relevant evidence has been received based only on the evidence of record at the time of the decision on appeal.

The Veteran filed a VA Form 10182, Decision Review Request: Board Appeal (Notice of Disagreement) in May 2025 and elected the Direct Review docket. 

Therefore, the Board may only consider the evidence of record at the time of the September 2024 and April 2025 agency of original jurisdiction (AOJ) decisions on appeal. 38 C.F.R. § 20.301. Any evidence submitted after the AOJ decision on appeal cannot be considered by the Board. 38 C.F.R. §§ 20.300, 20.301, 20.801. 

If the Veteran would like VA to consider any evidence that was submitted that the Board could not consider, the Veteran may file a Supplemental Claim (VA Form 20-0995) and submit or identify this evidence. 38 C.F.R. § 3.2501. If the evidence is new and relevant, VA will issue another decision on the claims, considering the new evidence in addition to the evidence previously considered. Id. Specific instructions for filing a Supplemental Claim are included with this decision. 

Law and Analysis

VA will readjudicate a
 after the AOJ decision on appeal cannot be considered by the Board. 38 C.F.R. §§ 20.300, 20.301, 20.801. 

If the Veteran would like VA to consider any evidence that was submitted that the Board could not consider, the Veteran may file a Supplemental Claim (VA Form 20-0995) and submit or identify this evidence. 38 C.F.R. § 3.2501. If the evidence is new and relevant, VA will issue another decision on the claims, considering the new evidence in addition to the evidence previously considered. Id. Specific instructions for filing a Supplemental Claim are included with this decision. 

Law and Analysis

VA will readjudicate a previously denied claim if new and relevant evidence is presented or secured. The Secretary shall then readjudicate the claim taking into consideration all of the evidence of record. 38 U.S.C. § 5108(a); 38 C.F.R. § 3.156. The AMA defines new evidence as evidence not previously part of the actual record before agency adjudicators and relevant evidence as information that tends to prove or disprove a matter at issue in a claim. 38 C.F.R. § 3.2501(a)(1). The new and relevant standard will not impose a higher evidentiary threshold than the previous new and material evidence standard under § 3.156(a). 38 U.S.C. § 5108; 38 C.F.R. § 3.2501.

In order to establish service connection for a present disability the claimant must show the existence of a present disability, an in-service incurrence or aggravation of a disease or injury, and a causal relationship or "nexus" between the present disability and the in-service injury or disease. Saunders v. Wilkie, 88 F.3d 1356, 1361 (Fed. Cir. 2018); Shedden v. Principi, 381 F.3d 1163, 1166-67 (Fed. Cir. 2004).

Except as otherwise provided by law, a claimant has the responsibility to present and support a claim for benefits. VA shall consider all information and lay and medical evidence of record in a case and when there is an approximate balance of positive and negative evidence regarding any issue material to the determination of a matter, VA shall give the benefit of the doubt to the claimant. 38 U.S.C. § 5107; Lynch v. McDonough, 21 F.4th 776 (Fed. Cir. 2021) (benefit-of-the-doubt rule not for application when evidence persuasively favors one side or the other).

New and Relevant Evidence 

The Veteran seeks readjudication of her claim of entitlement to service connection for degenerative disc disease with lumbosacral strain and scoliosis, previously claimed as spinal arthritis.

The Veteran's claim was denied in a December 2024 rating decision which found her condition existed prior to service and evidence did not demonstrate objective evidence of worsening or evidence of permanent worsening as a result of service. Within one year, the Veteran submitted a January 2025 Supplemental Claim. 

Accompanying the Veteran's January 2025 claim was a medical record noting medication and a documented diagnosis of lumbar radiculopathy. Though these records were not part of the evidence before agency adjudicators at the time of the December 2024 rating decision, they do not tend to prove or disprove a matter at issue in the case. While the evidence is new, it is not relevant such that readjudication of the claim seeking entitlement to service connection for degenerative disc disease with lumbosacral strain and scoliosis is warranted. Here, the evidence of record at the time of the December 2024 rating decision included a diagnosis of the Veteran's current disabilities.  

The Board finds the Veteran has not submitted evidence that was not previously part of the actual record before agency adjudicators which tends to prove or disprove a matter at issue in her claims. Accordingly, readjudication of entitlement to service connection for degenerative disc disease with lumbosacral strain and scoliosis is denied and the Board will not address the merits of the Veteran's claim at this time.

Left Finger

The Veteran seeks entitlement to service connection for left-side mallet finger which she asserts is due to injuries in service. The Veteran reports she cut her finger and while it was healing the digit was hit multiple times during field training. She reports an inability to feel her finger. See May 2024 claim.  

In order to be considered for service connection, a claimant must first have a current disability. See 38 U.S.C. § 1110, 1131; Saunders v. Wilkie, 886 F.3d 135
 connection for degenerative disc disease with lumbosacral strain and scoliosis is denied and the Board will not address the merits of the Veteran's claim at this time.

Left Finger

The Veteran seeks entitlement to service connection for left-side mallet finger which she asserts is due to injuries in service. The Veteran reports she cut her finger and while it was healing the digit was hit multiple times during field training. She reports an inability to feel her finger. See May 2024 claim.  

In order to be considered for service connection, a claimant must first have a current disability. See 38 U.S.C. § 1110, 1131; Saunders v. Wilkie, 886 F.3d 1356, 1363 (Fed. Cir. 2018). The term "disability" refers to a functional impairment that reduces earning capacity. See Saunders, 886 F.3d at 1363. To establish a disability, the claimant's symptoms must result in "the level of a functional impairment of earning capacity." Id. at 1367-68. As noted by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit in Saunders, the policy underlying veterans' compensation is to compensate veterans whose ability to earn a living is impaired as a result of their military service. Id. Thus, service connection cannot be granted for injuries or diseases that are acute and transitory in nature, and do not result in residual functional impairment, because such injuries or diseases by definition would not reduce earning capacity.

The Veteran's service treatment records reflect a prior diagnosis of left-side mallet finger and treatment for the condition. A March 2024 note found the Veteran regained full extension of her digit and no mallet deformity was noted. 

The Veteran submitted an August 2024 radiology report regarding her left fingers which found no evidence of fracture or other significant bone, joint, or soft tissue abnormality. The provider noted no radiopaque foreign body and no dislocation.

The Veteran was afforded an August 2024 VA examination where the examiner noted her left side was normal. The Veteran reported a history of intermittent, aching pain with active range of motion or overuse. The examiner noted a normal range of motion with no evidence of pain. The Veteran also had normal grip strength. The examiner noted the August 2024 radiology report and March 2024 rehabilitation report noting the Veteran has full extension of her digit with no mallet deformity noted. 

The Board affords great probative weight to the August 2024 VA examination as the examiner conducted objective testing to evaluate all signs and symptoms which would indicate the Veteran's claimed disability. See Nieves-Rodriguez v. Peake, 22 Vet. App. 295, 302 (2009).

While the Veteran, as a lay person, is competent to offer testimony regarding the symptoms she observed, she is not competent to offer an opinion as to a diagnosis or etiology of her claimed left-side mallet finger in this instance because this matter falls outside the realm of common knowledge of a lay person. See Kahana v. Shinseki, 24 Vet. App. 428, 435 (2011); see also Jandreau v. Nicholson, 492 F.3d 1372, 1377 n. 4 (Fed. Cir. 2007).

Based on the foregoing, the Board finds the Veteran does not have a current disability for which compensation may be granted. 

Accordingly, the claim seeking entitlement to service connection for left-side mallet finger is denied.  

 

K. Parakkal

Veterans Law Judge

Board of Veterans' Appeals

Attorney for the Board	Filsinger, Alexandra Q.

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.