Citation Nr: 1303979	
Decision Date: 02/05/13    Archive Date: 02/08/13

DOCKET NO.  09-21 335	)	DATE
	)


On appeal from the decision of the 
Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Regional Office (RO) in Seattle, Washington


THE ISSUES

1.  Entitlement to a higher initial rating for a service-connected right knee disability, rated as 20 percent disabling prior to June 18, 2009, and as 30 percent disabling from that date.

2.  Entitlement to a higher initial rating for service-connected right ankle osteoarthritis, currently evaluated as 10 percent disabling. 



REPRESENTATION

Appellant represented by:	Disabled American Veterans



ATTORNEY FOR THE BOARD

C. L. Wasser, Counsel


INTRODUCTION

The Veteran served on active duty from December 1984 to December 1988, from August 1992 to November 1993, and from February 2003 to February 2005, with additional reserve service.

This case comes to the Board of Veterans' Appeals (Board) on appeal from a July 2008 decision by the RO in Seattle, Washington, that granted service connection and a 10 percent rating for right ankle osteoarthritis, granted service connection and a noncompensable rating for a right knee disability, and granted service connection and a noncompensable rating for a left elbow disability, each effective from December 2, 2007.  The Veteran appealed for higher ratings, and a statement of the case was promulgated as to all three issues in May 2009.  A VA Form 9 (substantive appeal) was received from the Veteran in June 2009, and she indicated that she was only appealing the issues of entitlement to higher ratings for her service-connected right knee and ankle disabilities.

In a September 2012 rating decision, the RO granted a higher 20 percent rating for the right knee disability, effective December 2, 2007, and a 30 percent rating effective June 18, 2009.  The RO also granted a higher 20 percent rating for the left elbow disability, effective April 14, 2012.


FINDINGS OF FACT

1.  The Veteran in this case served on active duty from December 1984 to December 1988, from August 1992 to November 1993, and from February 2003 to February 2005.

2.  On January 17, 2013, prior to the promulgation of a decision in the appeal, the Board received notification from the appellant, through her authorized representative, that a withdrawal of this appeal is requested.


CONCLUSION OF LAW

The criteria for withdrawal of an appeal by the appellant (or her authorized representative) have been met.  38 U.S.C.A. § 7105(b)(2), (d)(5) (West 2002); 38 C.F.R. § 20.204 (2012).


REASONS AND BASES FOR FINDINGS AND CONCLUSION

The Board may dismiss any appeal which fails to allege specific error of fact or law in the determination being appealed.  38 U.S.C.A. § 7105 (West 2002).  An appeal may be withdrawn as to any or all issues involved in the appeal at any time before the Board promulgates a decision.  38 C.F.R. § 20.204 (2012).  Withdrawal may be made by the appellant or by his or her authorized representative.  38 C.F.R. § 20.204.  In the present case, the appellant, through her authorized representative, has withdrawn this appeal and, hence, there remain no allegations  of errors of fact or law for appellate consideration.  Accordingly, the Board does not have jurisdiction to review the appeal and it is dismissed.


ORDER

The appeal is dismissed.



		
KELLI A. KORDICH
	Acting Veterans Law Judge, Board of Veterans' Appeals

Department of Veterans Affairs