BVA Case 14-0635: Ptsd

He contends that VA failed to satisfy its duty to assist him by gathering relevant documents and providing an adequate medical nexus opinion.

McAllister had refused to give him a medical nexus opinion,but that he could probably obtain those treatment records.

In April 2013,the Board determined that the appellant's testimony regarding his in-service duties and his continuity of symptomotology was new and material evidence sufficient to reopen the claim.

In August 2013,VA provided the appellant with a second medical examination and nexus opinion.

As an initial matter,the Board found that VA had complied with its duty to assist the appellant and that the April 2013 VA medical opinion was adequate for rating purposes.

The Board also considered service connection based on the appellant's report that his knee symptoms were continuous since service, but found that the appellant's statements in that regard lacked credibility due to,inter alia,inconsistency with other evidence of record.

Finally, the Board determined that the evidence was insufficient to directly establish that the appellant's knee conditions were related to service,relying primarily on the August 2013 VA medical opinion.

ANALYSIS Establishing service connection generally requires medical or,in certain circumstances,lay evidence of (1)a current disability;(2)an in-service incurrence or aggravation of a disease or injury; and (3)a nexus between the claimed in-service disease or injury and the present disability.