Walsh: Obesity as "intermediate step"

Walsh v. Wilkiedocket no. 18-0495 (February 24, 2020)

HELD: Obesity may be an “intermediate step” between a service-connected condition and a nonservice-connected condition when the service-connected condition aggravates the obesity. The service-connected condition need not cause the obesity.

SUMMARY: Veteran was service connected for bilateral knee, hip, and back conditions and sought service connection on a secondary basis for hypertension and sleep apnea. While her appeal was pending, VA issued a General Counsel Precedent Opinion (GC Prec. Op. 1-2017) stating that while obesity is not a disability for VA compensation purposes, obesity can serve as an “intermediate step” between a service-connected and nonservice-connected condition under 38 C.F.R. § 3.310(a). VA then sought a medical opinion to determine (1) whether the veteran’s service-connected conditions “caused” her to gain weight or become obese and, (2) if so, whether the obesity was a “substantial factor” in causing her hypertension or sleep apnea, and, (3) if so, whether those conditions would not have occurred but for the obesity that was “caused” by the service-connected condition. The examiner provided a negative opinion, focusing on the causation and “but-for” factors – and the Board relied on the opinion to deny the claim. 

On appeal to the Court, the veteran argued that the GC Opinion requires VA to determine whether the obesity was caused or aggravated by the service-connected conditions. The Court agreed, noting that the GC Opinion does not mention aggravation. Still, the Court found that “the principles contained in § 3.310 make any distinction in G.C. Opinion 1-2017 between causation and aggravation legally untenable.” 

The Court first noted that GC Opinions are binding on the Board, but not the Court. Turning to the language of the regulation: section 3.310(a) states that a “disability which is proximately due to or the result of a service-connected disease or injury shall be service connected.” Section 3.310(b) states: “Any increase in severity of a nonservice-connected disease or injury that is proximately due to or the result of a service-connected disease or injury, and not due to the natural progress of the nonservice-connected disease, will be service connected.” The Court found that the “operative language in these provisions is essentially identical” because “[b]oth discus something that ‘is proximately due to or the result of a service-connected disease or injury’ and advise that this ‘shall [or will] be service connected.’” The Court found that “[n]othing in this language justifies a distinction between causation and aggravation in the first step of the analysis in G.C. Opinion 1-2017.” 

The Court thus held that “there is no permissible basis in the relevant regulation for concluding that obesity may be an ‘intermediate step’ in a secondary-service-connection analysis when service-connected disability causes it, but not when service-connected disability aggravates it.” Regarding the absence of the word “aggravation” in the GG Opinion, the Court found that the opinion “does not purport to prohibit inquiry into whether a service-connected disability aggravates a veteran’s obesity” since “this would contradict VA’s aggravation regulation.” The Court clarified that “[d]espite the G.C. opinion’s silence regarding aggravation, the Board, in accordance with § 3.310(b), must consider aggravation in this context when the theory is explicitly raised by the veteran or reasonably raised by the record.” The Court remanded for the Board to obtain a new medical opinion that addresses whether the veteran’s service-connected conditions caused or aggravated her weight gain. 

Langdon: Rating thoracic/lumbar spine conditions

Langdon v. Wilkiedocket no. 18-0520 (February 5, 2020)

HELD: “[T]he functional impairment caused by appellant’s non-service-connected lumbar spine disability cannot be considered when rating his thoracic spine disability where there is medical evidence distinguishing between impairments caused by the thoracic and lumbar spine disabilities.”  

SUMMARY: Veteran filed a claim for service connection for thoracic and lumbar spine disabilities and was service-connected for the thoracic spine condition, rated 0%. He appealed and the Board remanded for the RO to address the lumbar spine disability, noting that the thoracic and lumbar spine are evaluated together in VA’s rating schedule. 

The RO obtained a medical opinion that concluded that his lumbar spine disability was not related to service, that there was no functional impairment due to the thoracic spine disability, and that all the veteran’s current functional impairment (decreased range of motion) was due to the nonservice-connected lumbar spine disability. The Board ultimately granted a 10% rating for the thoracic spine disability under 38 C.F.R. §§ 4.45 and 4.59, but denied a higher rating. 

On appeal to the Court, the veteran argued that the Board incorrectly applied 38 C.F.R. § 4.71a, Diagnostic Code (DC) 5237 because that DC considers the thoracic and lumbar spine as a single unit. 

DC 5237 rates disabilities of the thoracic and lumbar spine based on range of motion of the thoracolumbar spine – and describes those ranges using the word “thoracolumbar.” The Court noted this language, but relied on the first regulation in VA’s rating schedule, 38 C.F.R. § 4.1, which makes it “clear that the rating schedule is meant to compensate only service-connected disabilities.” The Court thus rejected the veteran’s argument because it “would mean that he would be compensated for his non-service-connected lumbar spine disability simply because he happens to have a service-connected thoracic spine condition.” The Court found that while DC 5237 “calls for the thoracic and lumbar spines generally to be rated as a unit … it does not mandate that they be rated together.” 

The Court emphasized that the regulation combines the thoracic and lumbar spine for rating purposes – and that “[t]he ‘logically up-stream element of service-connectedness’ is distinct from the ‘logically downstream element of compensation level.’” (quoting Grantham v. Brown 114 F.3d 1156, 1158-59 (Fed. Cir. 1997)). Because VA denied service connection for the veteran’s lumbar spine disability, it was not required to consider the lumbar spine when rating his service-connected thoracic spine disability.