Citation Nr: 18159430 Decision Date: 12/19/18 Archive Date: 12/19/18 DOCKET NO. 17-56 417 DATE: December 19, 2018 ORDER The appeal seeking an increased evaluation greater than 40 percent for residuals of prostate cancer, status post prostatectomy, with urinary incontinence is dismissed. The appeal seeking an increased evaluation greater than 20 percent for diabetes mellitus, type II, is dismissed. The appeal seeking an increased evaluation greater than 20 percent for essential hypertension is dismissed. The appeal seeking an increased evaluation greater than 10 percent for maxillary sinusitis is dismissed. The appeal seeking an increased evaluation greater than 10 percent for right lower extremity diabetic peripheral neuropathy is dismissed. The appeal seeking an increased evaluation greater than 10 percent for left lower extremity diabetic peripheral neuropathy is dismissed. The appeal seeking to reopen a claim for service connection for glaucoma (also claimed as cataracts), to include as secondary to diabetes mellitus, type II, is dismissed. The appeal seeking effective dates earlier than May 15, 2014, for the increased evaluations of residuals of prostate cancer and maxillary sinusitis is dismissed. The appeal seeking service connection for an acquired psychological disorder is dismissed. The appeal seeking a total disability rating due to individual unemployability (TDIU) is dismissed. FINDINGS OF FACT 1. On November 13, 2018, prior to the promulgation of a decision in the appeal, the Board received notification from the Veteran, through his authorized representative, that a withdrawal of the issue of an increased evaluation greater than 40 percent for residuals of prostate cancer, status post prostatectomy, with urinary incontinence is requested. 2. On November 13, 2018, prior to the promulgation of a decision in the appeal, the Board received notification from the Veteran, through his authorized representative, that a withdrawal of the issue of an increased evaluation greater than 20 percent for diabetes mellitus, type II, is requested. 3. On November 13, 2018, prior to the promulgation of a decision in the appeal, the Board received notification from the Veteran, through his authorized representative, that a withdrawal of the issue of an increased evaluation greater than 20 percent for essential hypertension is requested. 4. On November 13, 2018, prior to the promulgation of a decision in the appeal, the Board received notification from the Veteran, through his authorized representative, that a withdrawal of the issue of an increased evaluation greater than 10 percent for maxillary sinusitis is requested. 5. On November 13, 2018, prior to the promulgation of a decision in the appeal, the Board received notification from the Veteran, through his authorized representative, that a withdrawal of the issue of an increased evaluation greater than 10 percent for right lower extremity diabetic peripheral neuropathy is requested. 6. On November 13, 2018, prior to the promulgation of a decision in the appeal, the Board received notification from the Veteran, through his authorized representative, that a withdrawal of the issue of an increased evaluation greater than 10 percent for left lower extremity diabetic peripheral neuropathy is requested. 7. On November 13, 2018, prior to the promulgation of a decision in the appeal, the Board received notification from the Veteran, through his authorized representative, that a withdrawal of the issue of reopening a claim for service connection for glaucoma (also claimed as cataracts), to include as secondary to diabetes mellitus, type II, is requested. 8. On November 13, 2018, prior to the promulgation of a decision in the appeal, the Board received notification from the Veteran, through his authorized representative, that a withdrawal of the issue of effective dates earlier than May 15, 2014, for the increased evaluations of residuals of prostate cancer and maxillary sinusitis is requested. 9. The September 2018 rating decision that granted service connection for major depressive disorder is a complete grant of the benefits sought on appeal. 10. The September 2018 rating decision that granted a TDIU is a complete grant of the benefits sought on appeal. CONCLUSIONS OF LAW 1. The criteria for withdrawal of an appeal are met as to the claim seeking an increased evaluation greater than 40 percent for residuals of prostate cancer, status post prostatectomy, with urinary incontinence; the Board has no further jurisdiction in this matter. 38 U.S.C. § 7105(b)(2), (d)(5) (2012); 38 C.F.R. § 20.204 (2017). 2. The criteria for withdrawal of an appeal are met as to the claim seeking an increased evaluation greater than 20 percent for diabetes mellitus, type II; the Board has no further jurisdiction in this matter. 38 U.S.C. § 7105(b)(2), (d)(5) (2012); 38 C.F.R. § 20.204 (2017). 3. The criteria for withdrawal of an appeal are met as to the claim seeking an increased evaluation greater than 20 percent for essential hypertension; the Board has no further jurisdiction in this matter. 38 U.S.C. § 7105(b)(2), (d)(5) (2012); 38 C.F.R. § 20.204 (2017). 4. The criteria for withdrawal of an appeal are met as to the claim seeking an increased evaluation greater than 10 percent for maxillary sinusitis; the Board has no further jurisdiction in this matter. 38 U.S.C. § 7105(b)(2), (d)(5) (2012); 38 C.F.R. § 20.204 (2017). 5. The criteria for withdrawal of an appeal are met as to the claim seeking an increased evaluation greater than 10 percent for right lower extremity diabetic peripheral neuropathy; the Board has no further jurisdiction in this matter. 38 U.S.C. § 7105(b)(2), (d)(5) (2012); 38 C.F.R. § 20.204 (2017). 6. The criteria for withdrawal of an appeal are met as to the claim seeking an increased evaluation greater than 10 percent for left lower extremity diabetic peripheral neuropathy; the Board has no further jurisdiction in this matter. 38 U.S.C. § 7105(b)(2), (d)(5) (2012); 38 C.F.R. § 20.204 (2017). 7. The criteria for withdrawal of an appeal are met as to the claim seeking to reopen a claim for service connection for glaucoma (also claimed as cataracts); the Board has no further jurisdiction in this matter. 38 U.S.C. § 7105(b)(2), (d)(5) (2012); 38 C.F.R. § 20.204 (2017). 8. The criteria for withdrawal of an appeal are met as to the claim seeking effective dates earlier than May 15, 2014, for the increased evaluations of residuals of prostate cancer and maxillary sinusitis; the Board has no further jurisdiction in this matter. 38 U.S.C. § 7105(b)(2), (d)(5) (2012); 38 C.F.R. § 20.204 (2017). 9. There are no remaining questions of fact or law to be decided on the issue of entitlement to service connection for an acquired psychological disorder. 38 U.S.C. § 7104 (2012). 10. There are no remaining questions of fact or law to be decided on the issue of entitlement to TDIU. 38 U.S.C. § 7104 (2012). REASONS AND BASES FOR FINDING AND CONCLUSION 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 appellant, through his authorized representative, 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. After the Veteran filed his substantive appeal (VA Form 9), his appeal of entitlement to service connection for an acquired psychological disorder and a TDIU was granted in a September 2018 rating decision. Because that decision represents a full grant of the benefit sought, there are no remaining questions of law or fact over which the Board may exercise jurisdiction. Grantham v. Brown, 114 F.3d 1156 (Fed. Cir. 1997); see also 38 U.S.C. § 7104. Accordingly, these issues must be dismissed. [CONTINUED ON NEXT PAGE] If the Veteran disagrees with the amount of compensation or the effective date for such compensation for TDIU and his now service-connected major depressive disorder, he MUST submit the appeal on the required standard form, VA Form 21-0958 (if he has not already done so). VA amended its regulations to require all appeals be filed on standard forms prescribed by the Secretary, effective March 24, 2015. See 79 Fed. Reg. 57660 (Sept. 25, 2014). VICTORIA MOSHIASHWILI Veterans Law Judge Board of Veterans’ Appeals ATTORNEY FOR THE BOARD S. Lambert, Associate Counsel