Citation Nr: 18157343 Decision Date: 12/12/18 Archive Date: 12/12/18 DOCKET NO. 15-03 895 DATE: December 12, 2018 ORDER Entitlement to rating in excess of 20 percent for transitional lumbosacral vertebra, with facet arthropathy L5-S1 is dismissed. REMANDED Entitlement to a rating in excess of 10 percent for residuals of left shoulder acromioclavicular joint separation prior to November 26, 2013, and in excess of 20 percent thereafter, is remanded. FINDING OF FACT The Veteran specifically excluded from appeal the issue of entitlement to a rating in excess of 30 percent for transitional lumbosacral vertebra, with facet arthropathy L5-S1, and neither he nor his representative have shown any indication of pursuing an appeal of the issue since the issuance of the December 2014 statement of the case; it is unclear why this issue was certified to the Board. CONCLUSION OF LAW The criteria for dismissal of an appeal due to lack of jurisdiction have been met. 38 U.S.C. § 7105(b)(2), (d)(5); 38 C.F.R. §§ 20.101, 20.200, 20.202. REASONS AND BASES FOR FINDING AND CONCLUSION The Veteran served on active duty from June 1981 to June 2001. In January 2015, the Veteran requested a hearing before the Board of Veterans’ Appeals (Board). In November 2017, the Veteran withdrew his hearing request. The rating for the Veteran’s left shoulder disorder was increased to 20 percent in a December 2014 Statement of the Case, albeit only as of November 26, 2013, subsequent to the September 2012 claim. The prior 10 percent rating and current 20 percent rating are thus both on appeal. Entitlement to rating in excess of 20 percent for transitional lumbosacral vertebra, with facet arthropathy L5-S1. 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 An appeal may be withdrawn as to any or all issues involved in the appeal at any time before the Board promulgates a decision. 38 C.F.R. § 20.204. In the present case, the Veteran’s January 2015 VA Form 9 indicated that he was only appealing the left shoulder claim currently on appeal; for under a section stating, “these are the issues I want to appeal to the Board,” the Veteran marked a box stating that “I have read the [Statement of the Case] and any [Supplemental Statement of the Case] I received. I am only appealing these issues” and he identified only the left shoulder claim. After submitting the January 2015 VA Form 9, the Veteran’s representative submitted statements in November 2015 and November 2018 in which only the left shoulder issue was addressed. It is unclear why the Regional Office certified this issue to the Board in August 2015. Accordingly, the Board does not have jurisdiction to review the appeal with respect to the lumbosacral vertebra increased rating claim, and it is dismissed. REASONS FOR REMAND Entitlement to increased ratings for residuals of left shoulder acromioclavicular joint separation is remanded. The Veteran submitted a November 2013 private examination in December 2013. In November 2018, the Veteran’s representative requested a new VA examination to adequately document the current severity of the Veteran’s left shoulder disability. Particularly as the Veteran has not been examined since the receipt of the private examination, the Board will for a new VA examination. See Snuffer v. Gober, 10 Vet. App. 400 (1997). The matter is REMANDED for the following action: 1. Make efforts to obtain all outstanding medical records regarding the Veteran’s left shoulder in accordance with the duties set forth in 38 C.F.R. § 3.159(c). 2. Afford the Veteran a VA examination for his left shoulder disorder, with an appropriate examiner who has reviewed the claims file in conjunction with the examination. The most current Disability Benefits Questionnaire must be employed, and all relevant findings indicated in that questionnaire must be addressed. The examination must include joint testing for pain on both active and passive motion, in weight-bearing and nonweight-bearing, and, if possible, with range of motion measurements of the opposite undamaged joint. All opinions must be supported by a detailed rationale. A. C. MACKENZIE Veterans Law Judge Board of Veterans’ Appeals ATTORNEY FOR THE BOARD B. N. Quarles, Associate Counsel