CERVICAL SPINE LIMITATION OF MOTION

S. SORATHIA · 2026 · Case ID: A26040785

GRANTED

Summary

The Veteran, a Marine Corps Veteran who served from August 2003 to November 2007, including a deployment to Iraq, appeals the denial of service connection for a cervical spine strain, right wrist sprain, right knee strain, left knee strain, and right ankle strain. The Veteran contends that these conditions began during service due to physical training, combat-related incidents, and wear and tear. Lay statements from fellow service members corroborated the onset of symptoms, particularly a right wrist injury during Marine Corps Martial Arts Program training and knee injuries during physical training. Another service member's statement detailed a helicopter incident causing neck and back pain, and a fall on hydraulic fluid impacting the Veteran's ankle and causing pain. The Veteran also reported these issues during service and post-deployment health assessments. The Board found the Veteran's lay statements to be competent, credible, and probative, consistent with the demanding nature of his MOS and supported by STRs showing complaints of ankle pain and post-deployment reports of injury. While VA examinations were conducted, the Board found their rationale inadequate and afforded greater weight to the lay evidence. Applying the benefit of the doubt, service connection was granted for all five claimed conditions.

Rationale

Lay statements consistent with service; STRs show complaint of ankle pain; Benefit of the doubt applied

Service Branch

MARINE CORPS

Special Benefit

NO SPECIAL BENEFIT

Docket No.

250829-583660

Full Decision Text

Citation Nr: A26040785
Decision Date: 04/30/26 Archive Date: 04/30/26

DOCKET NO. 250829-583660
DATE: April 30, 2026

ORDER

Service connection for a cervical spine strain is granted.

Service connection for a right wrist sprain is granted.

Service connection for a right knee strain is granted.

Service connection for a left knee strain is granted.

Service connection for a right ankle strain is granted.

FINDINGS OF FACT

1. The Veteran's cervical spine strain began during his service.

2. The Veteran's right wrist sprain began during his service.

3. The Veteran's right knee strain began during his service.

4. The Veteran's left knee strain began during his service.

5. The Veteran's right ankle strain began during his service.

CONCLUSIONS OF LAW

1. The criteria for service connection for a cervical spine strain have been met. 38 U.S.C. §§ 1110, 1131, 5107; 38 C.F.R. §§ 3.102, 3.303.

2. The criteria for service connection for a right wrist sprain have been met. 38 U.S.C. §§ 1110, 1131, 5107; 38 C.F.R. §§ 3.102, 3.303.

3. The criteria for service connection for a right knee strain have been met. 38 U.S.C. §§ 1110, 1131, 5107; 38 C.F.R. §§ 3.102, 3.303.

4. The criteria for service connection for a left knee strain have been met. 38 U.S.C. §§ 1110, 1131, 5107; 38 C.F.R. §§ 3.102, 3.303.

5. The criteria for service connection for a right ankle strain have been met. 38 U.S.C. §§ 1110, 1131, 5107; 38 C.F.R. §§ 3.102, 3.303.

REASONS AND BASES FOR FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS

The Veteran served in the United States Marine Corps from August 2003 to November 2007. His medals include the Iraq Campaign Medal. This matter comes before the Board of Veterans' Appeals (Board) on appeal from a rating decision issued in April 2025 by a Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Agency of Original Jurisdiction (AOJ) under the modernized appeals system known as the Appeals Modernization Act.

In the August 2025 VA Form 10182, Decision Review Request: Board Appeal (Notice of Disagreement), the Veteran elected the Direct Review docket. Therefore, the Board may only consider the evidence of record at the time of the April 2025 AOJ decision 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.

The Board notes that pursuant to Williams v. McDonough, 37 Vet. App. 305 (U.S. 2024), due to the possibility of a docket switch, the Board cannot adjudicate an appeal until after one year from the date the AOJ mailed the decision on appeal, or 60 days from the date the Board received the VA Form 10182, whichever is later. However, as the service connection claims are being granted, this is considered to be a full award of the benefits sought and there is no prejudice to the Veteran.

1. Entitlement to service connection for a cervical spine strain.

2. Entitlement to service connection for a right wrist sprain.

3. Entitlement to service connection for a right knee strain.

4. Entitlement to service connection for a left knee strain.

5. Entitlement to service connection for a right ankle strain.

In February 2025 correspondence, the Veteran asserts through his representative that the submitted lay evidence establishes the onset of symptoms for the Veteran's conditions during his service. He contends that his symptoms were present during active-duty service and that the diagnoses were later confirmed by a medical professional. Finally, he contends that service connection is warranted
is considered to be a full award of the benefits sought and there is no prejudice to the Veteran.

1. Entitlement to service connection for a cervical spine strain.

2. Entitlement to service connection for a right wrist sprain.

3. Entitlement to service connection for a right knee strain.

4. Entitlement to service connection for a left knee strain.

5. Entitlement to service connection for a right ankle strain.

In August 2025 correspondence, the Veteran reiterates his contentions.

Service connection may be granted for a disability resulting from disease or injury incurred in or aggravated during service. 38 U.S.C. §§ 1110, 1131, 5107; 38 C.F.R. § 3.303. Service connection requires competent evidence showing: (1) the existence of a present disability; (2) in-service incurrence or aggravation of a disease or injury; and (3) a causal relationship between the present disability and the disease or injury incurred or aggravated during service. Shedden v. Principi, 381 F.3d 1163, 1167 (Fed. Cir. 2004).

As to a current disability, the AOJ favorably found that the Veteran has March 2025 diagnoses of degenerative disc disease, left knee strain, right ankle strain, right knee strain, and a right wrist strain. Additionally, the AOJ favorably found that the Veteran's service treatment records (STRs) contain an August 2007 complaint of ankle pain. Notably, the Board is bound by the AOJ's favorable findings under the modernized review system absent clear and unmistakable error. 38 C.F.R. § 3.104 (c).

In October 2023 lay statements, the Veteran asserts that during his service, he injured his knees during physical training exercises, a combat-related incident, and slipping. He asserts that he received medical care several times for pain, swelling, weakness, and muscle fatigue in his knees. Next, he asserts that his right wrist was injured during physical training exercises. Specifically, his right wrist was hyper-extended multiple times during defensive tactics training and Marine Corps Martial Arts Program training. Additionally, he states that he had a PRC119 radio accidentally dropped on his right wrist by another service member.

At the January 2024 and February 2024 VA examinations, the Veteran reported that his right wrist sprain is due to wear and tear from physical training, deployment, working with weapons, and carrying heavy equipment. He asserts that his cervical strain, right ankle strain, and bilateral knee strain are due to the wear and tear from physical training, deployment, long runs, and carrying heavy equipment and weights.

At the March 2025 VA examination, the Veteran reported that his bilateral knee strain and right wrist strain began in 2003 and are due to the wear and tear of his service. Additionally, he states that another service member fell on him during training and hurt his wrist.

With regards to his cervical strain, he stated that this disability began in 2006 after undergoing an emergency landing that hurt his neck during his service and is also due to the wear and tear of his service. The Veteran reported that his right ankle strain began in 2005 after a fall sustained during training and is due to the wear and tear of his service.

In a February 2025 lay statement, a fellow service member explains that in basic training, the Veteran hyper-extended his right wrist during Marine Corps Martial Arts Program training. He explains that each of the service members had been paired up to practice martial arts moves and a physically larger service member was being more aggressive than instructed. The service member explains that the larger service member threw himself down on top of the Veteran causing his right wrist to bend all the way back to his forearm. He explains that the Veteran tried to shake it off, but that the Veteran mentioned how painful it was.

While serving together in artillery school and during their deployment to Japan, he asserts that the same injury bothered the Veteran when they would exercise. Specifically, he contends that this issue bothered the Veteran when performing push-ups and pull-ups and during field operations. He contends that the Veteran would often mention how much this affected him during his tour in Iraq in 2006. Finally, he states that he knows the injury still bothers the Veteran and impedes his activities to this day.

In a separate February 2025 lay statement, another service member states that in October 2006 their unit was in Iraq when the Veteran had been separated from the team and had to take several helicopters to rejoin them as they passed through the operating base. He explains that the Veteran was delayed by a day and that when the Veteran landed, he mentioned that one of the helicopters he had been in had engine trouble, was forced to turn around mid-flight and make a "controlled fall/hard landing" of 10 to 15 feet when the helicopter finally returned to its point of origin. He contends that the Veteran mentioned that the jarring impact caused pain in his neck and back.

Next, he explains that on a subsequent mission, the Veteran was exiting the rear of a helicopter and slipped on hydraulic fluid that leaked onto the metal ramp. As a result, he states that the Veteran fell violently and painfully with his rifle and with all his gear. Throughout the remainder of the deployment, he states that the Veteran often attempted to adjust his sleeping position or the gear he would carry due to the pain. Finally, he states that throughout the years the Veteran has mentioned how much pain and discomfort this continues to cause him.

Upon review, the Board finds the Veteran's statements regarding the onset of his disabilities to be competent, credible, and probative. Jandreau v. Nicholson, 492 F.3d 1372, 1377 (Fed. Cir. 2007). Here, the Veteran has continuously reported that his disabilities are related to the physical nature of his service and that his disabilities began during his service.

Furthermore, the Veteran's lay statements are consistent with the nature and circumstances of his service and are supported by the evidence of record. Specifically, the Veteran's STRs contain an August 2007 report of medical assessment where the Veteran stated that he wants to have some of his various aches and pains investigated prior to his discharge and where he complained of experiencing ankle pain on deployment.

Additionally, in the September 2007 post deployment health assessment, the Veteran reported that he was injured due to a blast and fall during deployment. Finally, the Veteran's MOS as a Field Artillery Officer included physically demanding duties. Thus, the evidence weighs in favor of finding that the Veteran's disabilities began during his service.

The Board acknowledges that January 2024 and March 2025 VA medical opinions were obtained in connection with the claims and that the Veteran submitted a private medical opinion regarding the claims.

However, the Board finds that these medical opinions are inadequate as the clinicians offered in sufficient rationale. Nieves-Rodriguez v. Peake, 22 Vet. App. 295, 304 (2008); see also Stefl v. Nicholson, 21 Vet. App. 120, 124 (2007). Instead, as discussed above, the Board affords probative value to the lay statements of record.

Based on the foregoing, the Board finds the evidence weighs in favor of the Veteran's claims. Accordingly, the benefit-of-the-doubt doctrine is applicable and service connection for a cervical spine strain, a right wrist sprain, a right knee strain, a left knee strain, and a right ankle strain is warranted. 38 U.S.C. § 5107; 38 C.F.R. § 3.102. Lynch v. McDonough, 21 F.4th 776 (Fed. Cir. 2021) (en banc).

S. Sorathia

Veterans Law Judge

Board of Veterans' Appeals

Attorney for the Board Metoyer, D'Audra I.

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