Citation Nr: 18157901
Decision Date: 12/13/18	Archive Date: 12/13/18

DOCKET NO. 17-26 112
DATE:	December 13, 2018
ORDER
The appeal concerning the issue of entitlement to an earlier effective date, prior to October 17, 2016, for service connection for limitation of motion and recurrent dislocation of the left shoulder is dismissed.
FINDING OF FACT
Prior to the promulgation of a decision in the appeal, in January 2018 correspondence, the Veteran withdrew his appeal concerning the issue of entitlement to an earlier effective date for service connection for limitation of motion and recurrent dislocation of the left shoulder.
CONCLUSION OF LAW
The criteria for withdrawal of an appeal by the Veteran regarding the issue of entitlement to an earlier effective date for service connection for limitation of motion and recurrent dislocation of the left shoulder have been met. 38 U.S.C. § 7105(b)(2), (d)(5) (2012); 38 C.F.R. §§ 20.202, 20.204 (2017).
REASONS AND BASES FOR FINDING AND CONCLUSION
The Veteran served on active duty from September 1959 to May 1960.
This case is before the Board of Veterans’ Appeals (Board) on appeal from a December 2016 rating decision from the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Regional Office (RO) in Manchester, New Hampshire. Jurisdiction has since been transferred to the RO in Boston, Massachusetts.  
The appeal concerning the issue of entitlement to an earlier effective date, prior to October 17, 2016, for service connection for limitation of motion and recurrent dislocation of the left shoulder is dismissed.
Under 38 U.S.C. § 7105, the Board may dismiss any appeal which fails to allege specific error of fact or law in the determination being appealed. Except for appeals withdrawn on the record at a hearing, a substantive appeal may be withdrawn in writing at any time before the Board promulgates a decision. 38 C.F.R. § 20.204. Withdrawal may be made by the Veteran or by his or her authorized representative. 38 C.F.R. § 20.204. 
In January 2018 correspondence, the Veteran’s representative indicated that the Veteran was withdrawing his appeal concerning the issue of entitlement to an earlier effective date for service connection for limitation of motion and recurrent dislocation of the left shoulder. Hence, there remain no allegations of errors of fact or law for appellate consideration regarding this issue. Accordingly, the Board 






does not have jurisdiction to review this issue and it is dismissed.
 
 MICHAEL E. KILCOYNE
Veterans Law Judge
Board of Veterans’ Appeals
ATTORNEY FOR THE BOARD	Erin J. Trojanowski, Associate Counsel