28 Vet.App. at 170;

Single Judge Application; joint disabilities; 38 C.F.R. § 4.59 requires that “certain range of motion testing be conducted whenever possible in cases of joint disabilities.” Correia v. McDonald, 28 Vet.App. 158, 164, 168(2016). The regulation specifies that “[t]he joints involved should be tested for pain on both active and passive motion, in weight-bearing and nonweight-bearing and, if possible, with the range of the opposite undamaged joint.” 38 C.F.R. § 4.59 (2019). “If for some reason the examiner is unable to conduct the required testing or concludes that the required testing is not necessary . . . , he or she should clearly explain why that is so.” Correia, 28 Vet.App. at 170;

Designated for electronic publication onlyUNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR VETERANS CLAIMSNo. 19-1017NICHOLAS C. MAZZA, APPELLANT,V.ROBERT L. WILKIE,SECRETARY OF VETERANS AFFAIRS, APPELLEE.Before FALVEY, Judge.MEMORANDUM DECISIONNote: Pursuant to U.S. Vet. App. R. 30(a),this action may not be cited as precedent.FALVEY, Judge: Army veteran Nicholas C. Mazza appeals an October … [Read more...] about Single Judge Application; joint disabilities; 38 C.F.R. § 4.59 requires that “certain range of motion testing be conducted whenever possible in cases of joint disabilities.” Correia v. McDonald, 28 Vet.App. 158, 164, 168(2016). The regulation specifies that “[t]he joints involved should be tested for pain on both active and passive motion, in weight-bearing and nonweight-bearing and, if possible, with the range of the opposite undamaged joint.” 38 C.F.R. § 4.59 (2019). “If for some reason the examiner is unable to conduct the required testing or concludes that the required testing is not necessary . . . , he or she should clearly explain why that is so.” Correia, 28 Vet.App. at 170;