Citation Nr: 18155981 Decision Date: 12/06/18 Archive Date: 12/06/18 DOCKET NO. 11-15 790 DATE: December 6, 2018 ORDER The claim for entitlement to an initial increased rating for hiatal hernia and gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD), rated as noncompensable prior to April 7, 2016, and as 60 percent disabling as of that date, is dismissed. The claim for entitlement to an increased rating for lumbar spine degenerative disc disease (DDD), rated as 10 percent disabling prior to March 29, 2010, and as 20 percent disabling as of that date, is dismissed. The claim for entitlement to an initial compensable rating for allergic rhinitis is dismissed. The claim for entitlement to a total disability rating based on individual unemployability (TDIU) prior to April 7, 2016, is dismissed. FINDING OF FACT In October 2018, prior to the promulgation of a decision in the appeal, the Board received notification from the Veteran that he wanted to withdraw all appeals pending with the Board. CONCLUSIONS OF LAW 1. The criteria for withdrawal of a Substantive Appeal regarding the issue of entitlement to an initial increased rating for hiatal hernia and GERD, rated as noncompensable prior to April 7, 2016, and as 60 percent disabling as of that date, have been met. 38 U.S.C. § 7105(b)(2), (d)(5) (2012); 38 C.F.R. § 20.204 (2018). 2. The criteria for withdrawal of a Substantive Appeal regarding the issue of entitlement to an increased rating for lumbar spine DDD, rated as 10 percent disabling prior to March 29, 2010, and as 20 percent disabling as of that date, have been met. 38 U.S.C. § 7105(b)(2), (d)(5) (2012); 38 C.F.R. § 20.204 (2018). 3. The criteria for withdrawal of a Substantive Appeal regarding the issue of entitlement to an initial compensable rating for allergic rhinitis have been met. 38 U.S.C. § 7105(b)(2), (d)(5) (2012); 38 C.F.R. § 20.204 (2018). 4. The criteria for withdrawal of a Substantive Appeal regarding the issue of entitlement to a TDIU prior to April 7, 2016, have been met. 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 had honorable active duty service from July 1970 to July 1990. These matters come to the Board of Veterans' Appeals (Board) on appeal from an April 2009 rating decision issued by the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Regional Office (RO), which, in pertinent part, granted service connection for allergic rhinitis and hiatal hernia and GERD, and continued a 10 percent rating assigned for lumbar spine DDD. This appeal ensued. An April 2016 rating decision increased the ratings assigned for lumbar spine DDD and hiatal hernia and GERD. The Board remanded the claims, as well as a claim for entitlement to a TDIU in March 2017. The Board also remanded a claim for service connection for sleep apnea, which was subsequently granted in an August 2018 rating decision. As such, that issue is no longer before the Board for appellate review. The April 2018 rating decision also granted entitlement to a TDIU effective April 7, 2016. Withdrawals 1. Entitlement to an initial increased rating for hiatal hernia and GERD, rated as noncompensable prior to April 7, 2016, and as 60 percent disabling as of that date 2. Entitlement to an increased rating for lumbar spine DDD, rated as 10 percent disabling prior to March 29, 2010, and as 20 percent disabling as of that date 3. Entitlement to an initial compensable rating for allergic rhinitis 4. Entitlement to a TDIU prior to April 7, 2016 Under 38 U.S.C. § 7105 (2012), the Board may dismiss any appeal which fails to allege specific error of fact or law in the determination being appealed. A Substantive Appeal may be withdrawn in writing at any time before the Board promulgates a decision. 38 C.F.R. § 20.202 (2018). Withdrawal may be made by the appellant or by his or her authorized representative. 38 C.F.R. § 20.204 (2018). In October 2018, prior to the promulgation of a decision in the appeal, the Board was advised that the Veteran wanted to withdraw all appeals pending with the Board. As the Veteran has withdrawn his appeal concerning the claims listed above, there remain no allegations of errors of fact or law for appellate consideration. Accordingly, the Board does not have jurisdiction to review the appeal concerning these claims and they are dismissed. K. A. BANFIELD Veterans Law Judge Board of Veterans’ Appeals ATTORNEY FOR THE BOARD D. Van Wambeke, Counsel