Citation Nr: 20003755 Decision Date: 01/16/20 Archive Date: 01/15/20 DOCKET NO. 19-16 844 DATE: January 16, 2020 ORDER Entitlement to service connection for erectile dysfunction is dismissed. Entitlement to an evaluation in excess of 40 percent for degenerative disk disease at L5-S1, with chronic lumbosacral strain, is dismissed. Entitlement to an evaluation in excess of 20 percent for radiculopathy, right lower extremity, is dismissed. Entitlement to an evaluation in excess of 20 percent for radiculopathy, left lower extremity, is dismissed. Entitlement to an evaluation in excess of 50 percent for depressive disorder is dismissed. FINDINGS OF FACT In September 2019, prior to the promulgation of a decision in the appeal, the Veteran submitted a written request to withdrawal his appeal of all issues involved in this matter. CONCLUSIONS OF LAW 1. The criteria for withdrawal of an appeal of the issue of entitlement to service connection for erectile dysfunction by the appellant have been met. 38 U.S.C. § 7105; 38 C.F.R. § 20.205. 2. The criteria for withdrawal of an appeal of the issue of entitlement to an evaluation in excess of 40 percent for degenerative disk disease at L5-S1, with chronic lumbosacral strain, by the appellant have been met. 38 U.S.C. § 7105; 38 C.F.R. § 20.205. 3. The criteria for withdrawal of an appeal of the issue of entitlement to an evaluation in excess of 20 percent for radiculopathy, right lower extremity, by the appellant have been met. 38 U.S.C. § 7105; 38 C.F.R. § 20.205. 4. The criteria for withdrawal of an appeal of the issue of entitlement to an evaluation in excess of 20 percent for radiculopathy, left lower extremity, by the appellant have been met. 38 U.S.C. § 7105; 38 C.F.R. § 20.205. 5. The criteria for withdrawal of an appeal of the issue of entitlement to an evaluation in excess of 50 percent for depressive disorder by the appellant have been met. 38 U.S.C. § 7105; 38 C.F.R. § 20.205. REASONS AND BASES FOR FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS The Veteran served on active duty in the United States Army from June 1979 to February 1996. For his meritorious service, the Veteran was awarded (among numerous other decorations) the U.S. Army Gold Recruiter Badge. This matter comes before the Board of Veterans’ Appeals (Board) on appeal from November 2016 and January 2018 rating decisions by the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Regional Office (RO). The Veteran was previously represented by a private attorney. In September 2019, the Veteran’s attorney moved to withdraw from representing the Veteran. In October 2019, the Board informed the Veteran and his former attorney that the motion to withdraw as counsel had been granted. 1. Entitlement to service connection for erectile dysfunction. 2. Entitlement to an evaluation in excess of 40 percent for degenerative disk disease at L5-S1, with chronic lumbosacral strain. 3. Entitlement to an evaluation in excess of 20 percent for radiculopathy, right lower extremity. 4. Entitlement to an evaluation in excess of 20 percent for radiculopathy, left lower extremity. 5. Entitlement to an evaluation in excess of 50 percent for depressive disorder. 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 September 2019, prior to the promulgation of a decision in the appeal, the Veteran submitted a written request to withdrawal his appeal of all issues involved in this appeal. In that letter, the Veteran stated that his claim for a TDIU had been granted to the date that he sought. He specifically stated that he would like to withdraw his remaining claims from Board consideration. This withdrawal is clear and unambiguous, in writing, and signed by the Veteran. The Board appreciates the Veteran’s candor regarding his rating, and his wishes regarding his appeal shall be respected. Accordingly, the Board finds that the Veteran has submitted a valid withdrawal of his claims remaining before the Board. His appeals are therefore dismissed. Evan M. Deichert Veterans Law Judge Board of Veterans’ Appeals Attorney for the Board W. Yates, Counsel The Board’s decision in this case is binding only with respect to the instant matter decided. This decision is not precedential, and does not establish VA policies or interpretations of general applicability. 38 C.F.R. § 20.1303.