09-07 338, 09-07 338

Veteran served on active duty Jun–Sep 1982 and in Army Reserves 1984–1991; alleges a broken nose from being struck by a tree branch in June 1985 during service.
Initially filed for service connection for residuals of a broken nose; RO rating decision in Feb 2008; Board denied in May 2014; CAVC vacated and remanded (Nov 2015); Board remanded for development May 2016 and ordered VA exam and records search.
Service treatment records note being hit by a tree branch with a corneal abrasion; no contemporaneous documentation of nasal trauma or bloody nose in STRs.
Post-service records: nasal surgery in 1990 (records destroyed/unavailable) and first documented diagnosis of sinusitis in 1999; claimant reports chronic sinus symptoms and post-nasal drip since the 1985 incident.
VA provided a 2016 nexus exam diagnosing chronic sinusitis and opining, with rationale, that it is less likely than not related to the claimed in-service nasal injury (cited lack of in-service nasal trauma documentation and remote timing of sinus diagnosis).
Board found VA satisfied its notice and duty-to-assist obligations, credited the 2016 VA medical opinion over the Veteran’s lay assertions, and denied service connection.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument (Veteran)	Defendant's Argument (VA/Board)	Held
Entitlement to service connection for residuals of a broken nose (sinusitis)	Sinus problems (post-nasal drip, chronic sinusitis) began after being struck by a tree branch in service in 1985; thus sinusitis is service-connected	STRs show the tree-branch incident but only document corneal abrasion; no in-service nasal trauma or bloody nose noted; first sinus diagnosis years later; 2016 VA examiner opines against nexus	Denied — preponderance of evidence against service connection

Quartuccio v. Principi, 16 Vet. App. 183 (Vet. App. 2002) (VCAA notice requirements)
Pelegrini v. Principi, 18 Vet. App. 112 (Vet. App. 2004) (VCAA notice requirements)
Barr v. Nicholson, 21 Vet. App. 303 (Vet. App. 2007) (adequacy of VA examination and rationale)
Jandreau v. Nicholson, 492 F.3d 1372 (Fed. Cir. 2007) (lay evidence competency limits)
Buchanan v. Nicholson, 451 F.3d 1331 (Fed. Cir. 2006) (service-connection elements)
Hickson v. West, 12 Vet. App. 247 (Vet. App. 1999) (service connection requirements)
Gilbert v. Derwinski, 1 Vet. App. 49 (Vet. App. 1990) (benefit-of-the-doubt rule)
Timberlake v. Gober, 14 Vet. App. 122 (Vet. App. 2000) (reasons for rejecting favorable evidence)
Gonzales v. West, 218 F.3d 1378 (Fed. Cir. 2000) (scope of record discussion required)
Wells v. Principi, 326 F.3d 1381 (Fed. Cir. 2003) (VA duty to assist and records searches)
Golz v. Shinseki, 590 F.3d 1317 (Fed. Cir. 2010) (futility when records destroyed)
Stegall v. West, 11 Vet. App. 268 (Vet. App. 1998) (remand compliance requirement)
Bryant v. Shinseki, 23 Vet. App. 488 (Vet. App. 2010) (VLJ hearing duties)