Citation Nr: 18140996
Decision Date: 10/09/18	Archive Date: 10/09/18

DOCKET NO. 15-46 254
DATE:	October 9, 2018
ORDER
Entitlement to an evaluation in excess of 40 percent for lumbar strain is dismissed.
Entitlement to an evaluation in excess of 10 percent for left knee strain with shin splints is dismissed.
Entitlement to an evaluation in excess of 10 percent prior to April 4, 2016, and in excess of 40 percent thereafter, for right knee strain with limitation of motion and shin splints is dismissed.
Entitlement to an evaluation in excess of 10 percent prior to April 4, 2016, and in excess of 40 percent thereafter for radiculopathy, left sciatic nerve is dismissed.
Entitlement to an evaluation in excess of 10 percent prior to April 4, 2016, and in excess of 40 percent thereafter for radiculopathy, right sciatic nerve is dismissed.



FINDING OF FACT
The Veteran submitted an August 2018 written statement withdrawing his appeal of the issues of increased ratings for lumbar strain, bilateral knee strain and bilateral radiculopathy.
CONCLUSIONS OF LAW
1. The criteria for withdrawal of the appeal of the issue of an increased rating for lumbar strain have been met.  38 U.S.C. § 7105 (2012); 38 C.F.R. § 20.204 (2017).
2. The criteria for withdrawal of the appeal of the issue of an increased rating for left knee strain with shin splints have been met.  38 U.S.C. § 7105 (2012); 38 C.F.R. § 20.204 (2017).
3. The criteria for withdrawal of the appeal of the issue of an increased rating for right knee strain with limitation of motion and shin splints have been met.  38 U.S.C. § 7105 (2012); 38 C.F.R. § 20.204 (2017).
4. The criteria for withdrawal of the appeal of the issue of an increased rating for radiculopathy, left sciatic nerve have been met.  38 U.S.C. § 7105 (2012); 38 C.F.R. § 20.204 (2017).
5. The criteria for withdrawal of the appeal of the issue of an increased rating for radiculopathy, right sciatic nerve have been met.  38 U.S.C. § 7105 (2012); 38 C.F.R. § 20.204 (2017).
REASONS AND BASES FOR FINDING AND CONCLUSIONS
The Veteran served on active duty from September 1987 to January 1990 and in January 1991, with additional periods of reserve service.  This matter came before the Board of Veterans Appeals (Board) on appeal from a June 2014 rating decision of the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Regional Office (RO).  
1. Entitlement to an evaluation in excess of 40 percent for lumbar strain
2. Entitlement to an evaluation in excess of 10 percent for left knee strain with shin splints 
3. Entitlement to an evaluation in excess of 10 percent prior to April 4, 2016, and in excess of 40 percent thereafter, for right knee strain with limitation of motion and shin splints
4. Entitlement to an evaluation in excess of 10 percent prior to April 4, 2016, and in excess of 40 percent thereafter for radiculopathy, left sciatic nerve 
5. Entitlement to an evaluation in excess of 10 percent prior to April 4, 2016, and in excess of 40 percent thereafter for radiculopathy, right sciatic nerve 
An appeal may be withdrawn by an appellant or his or her authorized representative 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.  The Veteran submitted an August 2018 written statement stating that he wanted to close all open appeals.  The statement was accompanied by an August 2018 letter from the Veteran’s representative confirming the withdrawal of each issue, and the representative subsequently filed a September 2018 motion to withdraw the appeal, stating that the Veteran had withdrawn the appeal in his August 2018 statement.  As the Veteran submitted a written statement indicating in clear language that he wished to withdraw his appeal, and his intent was confirmed in a statement and a formal motion for withdrawal by the Veteran’s representative, the Board finds that the withdrawal was explicit, unambiguous and done with the full understanding of the consequences of such an action.  See DeLisio v. Shinseki, 25 Vet. App. 45 (2011).  
Accordingly, the Board does not have jurisdiction to review the issues on appeal, and the appeal is dismissed.  38 C.F.R. § 20.204.

 
E. I. VELEZ
Veterans Law Judge
Board of Veterans’ Appeals
ATTORNEY FOR THE BOARD	A. Arnold, Associate Counsel