Frazier v. McDonough, 66 F.4th 1353

Clarence Frazier, Navy veteran with service‑connected PTSD, fractured his right fourth and fifth fingers in 2008 after being startled by a nightmare.
In 2010 he filed a VA claim asserting the finger injuries were secondary to PTSD; the regional office originally denied service connection but the Board later granted service connection.
A VA examiner documented pain and flare‑ups with difficulty holding objects but found normal range of motion, normal strength, and no ankylosis.
The RO assigned a 0% (non‑compensable) rating under Diagnostic Code (DC) 5230 (limitation of motion of ring/little finger); the Board and Veterans Court affirmed that rating.
Appellant sought at least a 10% rating under 38 C.F.R. § 4.59 (painful motion entitles joint to minimum compensable rating); the Veterans Court relied on Sowers v. McDonald and denied relief.
On appeal, the Federal Circuit affirmed: § 4.59 must be read with the applicable diagnostic code and does not create a freestanding entitlement to a compensable rating for any painful joint; zero percent ratings are permissible.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether 38 C.F.R. § 4.59 creates a freestanding entitlement to at least a 10% (minimum compensable) rating for any painful joint regardless of the applicable diagnostic code	§ 4.59 requires awarding at least the minimum compensable rating for the joint when pain is present; because some DCs for those fingers have a 10% minimum, Frazier’s pain should yield at least 10%	§ 4.59 is a guide to interpret the rating schedule and must be read in conjunction with the specific diagnostic code; it does not create a freestanding pain-based entitlement	Affirmed: § 4.59 is read with the applicable DC; it does not mandate a freestanding 10% rating where the applicable DC (5230) yields 0% (following Sowers)
Whether the Secretary may assign 0% (non‑compensable) ratings despite 38 U.S.C. provisions listing 10–100% grades	Congress established ten compensable grades (10–100%), so no statutory basis for non‑compensable ratings; therefore 0% ratings are impermissible	Statutes and longstanding practice recognize service‑connected but non‑compensable disabilities; other statutes/regulations and historical practice use 0% ratings	Affirmed: 0% non‑compensable ratings are lawful; statutes and VA practice recognize non‑compensable service‑connected disabilities

Sowers v. McDonald, 27 Vet. App. 472 (Vet. App. 2016) (held § 4.59 does not create a freestanding 10% painful‑motion disability and should be read with the applicable diagnostic code)
Kisor v. Wilkie, 139 S. Ct. 2400 (2019) (framework for deference to reasonable agency interpretations of ambiguous regulations)
Goodman v. Shulkin, 870 F.3d 1383 (Fed. Cir. 2017) (start with regulatory text to determine plain meaning)
Saunders v. Wilkie, 886 F.3d 1356 (Fed. Cir. 2018) (pain can constitute a disability for service‑connection if it impairs earning capacity)
Pitsker v. Office of Pers. Mgmt., 234 F.3d 1378 (Fed. Cir. 2000) (avoid constructions that lead to absurd results)
Smith v. Brown, 35 F.3d 1516 (Fed. Cir. 1994) (canons of statutory construction apply to regulations)
Hudgens v. Gibson, 26 Vet. App. 558 (Vet. App. 2014) (interpretive principle: inclusion of criteria in one diagnostic code implies purposeful exclusion elsewhere)