11-29 693, 11-29 693

Veteran served on active duty Apr 1965–Apr 1968 and later filed for service connection for bilateral knee disorders; claim appealed to the Board after RO denial and remand.
Service treatment records (STRs) contain no complaints, treatment, or diagnosis of knee problems and separation exam in Apr 1968 showed no bilateral knee pathology.
Lay and buddy statements (including Veteran testimony) assert in‑service knee injuries (falls, being kicked, prolonged deck duty) and continuous symptoms since service.
Private records show no knee complaints from 1972–1999, but document left meniscal tear treated arthroscopically in 2001 and right medial meniscus tear and total right knee replacement in 2007; DJD/osteoarthritis noted by 2009 and in VA records through 2013.
VA obtained additional development, including a VA examination in Apr 2015; examiner reviewed records and opined it was less likely than not that current knee disorders were incurred in or caused by service, citing lack of contemporaneous treatment or diagnosis until many years post‑service.
Board found VA fulfilled notice and duty‑to‑assist/remand compliance, credited that the Veteran likely injured his knees in service but concluded the preponderance of medical evidence, including the VA opinion, does not establish service connection.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Entitlement to service connection for right knee disorder	Veteran contends knee pain and injury began in service (falls, being kicked, deck duty) and continued thereafter	VA/Board relies on STR silence, long symptom-free interval, and VA examiner opinion finding nexus less likely than not	Denied — preponderance of evidence against service connection
Entitlement to service connection for left knee disorder	Same as right knee: in‑service injury and continuous problems	Same as right knee: lack of contemporaneous treatment/diagnosis and probative VA opinion against nexus	Denied — preponderance of evidence against service connection

Scott v. McDonald, 789 F.3d 1375 (Fed. Cir. 2015) (VA notice requirements under VCAA)
Stegall v. West, 11 Vet. App. 268 (1998) (requirement that remand directives be substantially complied with)
Hickson v. West, 12 Vet. App. 247 (1999) (elements required to establish service connection)
Buchanan v. Nicolson, 451 F.3d 1331 (Fed. Cir. 2006) (competent lay evidence may be sufficient but Board retains weighting discretion)
Nieves‑Rodriguez v. Peake, 22 Vet. App. 295 (2008) (requirements for a sufficiently reasoned medical opinion)
Maxson v. Gober, 230 F.3d 1330 (Fed. Cir. 2000) (prolonged period without medical complaint may weigh against service connection)