Citation Nr: 1329689	
Decision Date: 09/17/13    Archive Date: 09/25/13

DOCKET NO.  09-11 672	)	DATE
	)


On appeal from the decision of the 
Department of Veterans Affairs Regional Office in Cleveland, Ohio


THE ISSUE

Entitlement to service connection for renal insufficiency, to include as secondary to service-connected type II diabetes mellitus.


REPRESENTATION

Appellant represented by:	Marine Corps League


ATTORNEY FOR THE BOARD

John Kitlas, Counsel



INTRODUCTION

The Veteran served on active duty from September 1967 to September 1971.

This matter is before the Board of Veterans' Appeals (Board) on appeal from a September 2007 rating decision by the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Regional Office (RO) in Cleveland, Ohio, which, in pertinent part, denied service connection for renal insufficiency to include as secondary to service-connected type II diabetes mellitus.

The record reflects that the Veteran originally requested a Board hearing in conjunction with this appeal, and such a hearing was scheduled for September 2013.  However, as discussed below, he has withdrawn his appeal which includes his scheduled hearing.


FINDING OF FACT

On August 22, 2013, prior to the promulgation of a decision in the appeal, the Board received notification from the Veteran that a withdrawal of this appeal is requested.


CONCLUSION OF LAW

The criteria for withdrawal of an appeal by the Veteran have been met.  38 U.S.C.A. § 7105(b)(2), (d)(5) (West 2002); 38 C.F.R. § 20.204 (2013).


REASONS AND BASES FOR FINDING 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  An appeal may be withdrawn as to any or all issues involved in the appeal at any time before the Board promulgates a decision.  38 C.F.R. § 20.204 (2013).  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 Veteran withdrew his appeal via a statement received in August 2013 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.




		
M. N. HYLAND
	Acting Veterans Law Judge, Board of Veterans' Appeals




Department of Veterans Affairs