Citation Nr: 18150415 Decision Date: 11/15/18 Archive Date: 11/15/18 DOCKET NO. 15-15 908 DATE: November 15, 2018 ORDER The appeal for entitlement to an increased rating for residuals of right scaphoid fracture is dismissed. The appeal for entitlement to an increased rating for traumatic arthritis of the lumbar spine is dismissed. The appeal for entitlement to an increased rating for left knee degenerative joint disease is dismissed. The appeal for entitlement to an increased rating for right knee degenerative joint disease is dismissed. The appeal for entitlement to an increased rating for pes planus is dismissed. The appeal for entitlement to an increased rating for bilateral plantar fasciitis is dismissed. The appeal for entitlement to an increased rating for degenerative changes of the bilateral first metatarsophalangeal joint is dismissed. The appeal for entitlement to an increased rating for residuals of a right thigh injury is dismissed. The appeal for entitlement to a compensable rating for early giant papillary conjunctivitis is dismissed. The appeal for entitlement to a compensable rating for an anterior right thigh scar is dismissed. The appeal for entitlement to an increased rating for posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) and traumatic brain injury (TBI) is dismissed. FINDING OF FACT In a signed statement dated August 10, 2018, prior to the promulgation of a decision in the appeal, the Veteran withdrew his appeal for the claims currently before the Board. CONCLUSIONS OF LAW 1. The criteria for withdrawal of an appeal by the Veteran have been met with respect to the issue of entitlement to an increased rating for residuals of right scaphoid fracture. 38 U.S.C. § 7105(b)(2), (d)(5) (2012); 38 § C.F.R. 20.204 (2018). 2. The criteria for withdrawal of an appeal by the Veteran have been met with respect to the issue of entitlement to an increased rating for traumatic arthritis of the lumbar spine. 38 U.S.C. § 7105(b)(2), (d)(5) (2012); 38 § C.F.R. 20.204 (2018). 3. The criteria for withdrawal of an appeal by the Veteran have been met with respect to the issue of entitlement to an increased rating for left knee degenerative joint disease. 38 U.S.C. § 7105(b)(2), (d)(5) (2012); 38 § C.F.R. 20.204 (2018). 4. The criteria for withdrawal of an appeal by the Veteran have been met with respect to the issue of entitlement to an increased rating for right knee degenerative joint disease. 38 U.S.C. § 7105(b)(2), (d)(5) (2012); 38 § C.F.R. 20.204 (2018). 5. The criteria for withdrawal of an appeal by the Veteran have been met with respect to the issue of entitlement to an increased rating for pes planus. 38 U.S.C. § 7105(b)(2), (d)(5) (2012); 38 § C.F.R. 20.204 (2018). 6. The criteria for withdrawal of an appeal by the Veteran have been met with respect to the issue of entitlement to an increased rating for bilateral plantar fasciitis. 38 U.S.C. § 7105(b)(2), (d)(5) (2012); 38 C.F.R. § 20.204 (2018). 7. The criteria for withdrawal of an appeal by the Veteran have been met with respect to the issue of entitlement to an increased rating for degenerative changes of the bilateral first metatarsophalangeal joint. 38 U.S.C. § 7105(b)(2), (d)(5) (2012); 38 § C.F.R. 20.204 (2018). 8. The criteria for withdrawal of an appeal by the Veteran have been met with respect to the issue of entitlement to an increased rating for residuals of a right thigh injury. 38 U.S.C. § 7105(b)(2), (d)(5) (2012); 38 § C.F.R. 20.204 (2018). 9. The criteria for withdrawal of an appeal by the Veteran have been met with respect to the issue of entitlement to a compensable rating for early giant papillary conjunctivitis. 38 U.S.C. § 7105(b)(2), (d)(5) (2012); 38 § C.F.R. 20.204 (2018). 10. The criteria for withdrawal of an appeal by the Veteran have been met with respect to the issue of entitlement to a compensable rating for an anterior right thigh scar. 38 U.S.C. § 7105(b)(2), (d)(5) (2012); 38 § C.F.R. 20.204 (2018). 11. The criteria for withdrawal of an appeal by the Veteran have been met with respect to the issue of entitlement to an increased rating for PTSD and TBI. 38 U.S.C. § 7105(b)(2), (d)(5) (2012); 38 § C.F.R. 20.204 (2018). REASONS AND BASES FOR FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS The Veteran served on active duty from October 1986 to August 1994, July 1995 to February 1997, and September 2000 to January 2007. This matter comes before the Board of Veterans’ Appeals (Board) on appeal from a January 2013 rating decision by the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Regional Office (RO) in Winston Salem, North Carolina (Agency of Original Jurisdiction (AOJ). Withdrawal of Appeal This matter comes before the Board on appeal from a January 2013 rating decision that addressed multiple increased rating claims, in addition to a claim for entitlement to individual unemployability. The Veteran filed a timely notice of disagreement, and the RO issued a Statement of the Case in March 2015. In May 2015, the Veteran filed a substantive appeal. While the appeal was pending certification to the Board, the RO granted the Veteran entitlement to service connection for TBI, headaches, and tinnitus; and entitlement to individual unemployability. See March 2017 Rating Decision. The Veteran wrote VA in August 2018. In his statement, the Veteran indicated his satisfaction with the award of a 100 percent rating and requested a withdrawal of his request for a hearing and the pending appeal for the issues before the Board. 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. § 7105. 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. 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 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. T. MAINELLI Veterans Law Judge Board of Veterans’ Appeals ATTORNEY FOR THE BOARD N. Rasool