Citation Nr: 20032280 Decision Date: 05/07/20 Archive Date: 05/07/20 DOCKET NO. 13-25 512A DATE: May 7, 2020 ORDER The issue of entitlement to a rating in excess of 70 percent for posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) with alcohol dependence is dismissed. The issue of entitlement to an effective date prior to February 15, 2011 for service connection of PTSD is dismissed. The issue of entitlement to a rating in excess of 20 percent for degenerative joint disease of the lumbar spine with bilateral sciatic neuropathy is dismissed. The issue of entitlement to a rating in excess of 10 percent for chondromalacia of the right patella is dismissed. The issue of entitlement to a total disability rating due to individual unemployability caused by service-connected disabilities (TDIU) is dismissed. FINDINGS OF FACT 1. In a March 2018 final decision, the Board granted a rating of 70 percent for the Veteran’s PTSD; and on May 21, 2019, the Board received notification from the Veteran, through his authorized representative, that a withdrawal of this appeal was requested with respect to that issue. 2. In a March 2018 final decision, the Board denied entitlement to an effective date prior to February 15, 2011 for service connection for PTSD; and on May 21, 2019, the Board received notification from the Veteran, through his authorized representative, that a withdrawal of this appeal was requested with respect to that issue. 3. In an April 2016 final decision, the Board restored a 20 percent rating for the Veteran’s degenerative joint disease of the lumbar spine with bilateral sciatic neuropathy; and on May 21, 2019, the Board received notification from the Veteran, through his authorized representative, that a withdrawal of this appeal was requested with respect to that issue. 4. In an October 2018 final decision, the Board denied an initial rating in excess of 10 percent for chondromalacia of the right patella; and on May 21, 2019, the Board received notification from the Veteran, through his authorized representative, that a withdrawal of this appeal was requested with respect to that issue. 5. In a March 2018 final decision, the Board granted the Veteran entitlement to a TDIU; and on May 21, 2019, the Board received notification from the Veteran, through his authorized representative, that a withdrawal of this appeal was requested with respect to that issue. CONCLUSIONS OF LAW 1. With respect to the issue of entitlement to a rating in excess of 70 percent for PTSD with alcohol dependence, the criteria for dismissal of an appeal have been met. 38 U.S.C. § 7105; 38 C.F.R. § 20.205. 2. With respect to the issue of entitlement to an effective date prior to February 15, 2011 for service connection for PTSD, the criteria for dismissal of an appeal have been met. 38 U.S.C. § 7105; 38 C.F.R. § 20.205. 3. With respect to the issue of entitlement to restoration of a 20 percent rating for degenerative joint disease of the lumbar spine with bilateral sciatic neuropathy, the criteria for dismissal of an appeal have been met. 38 U.S.C. § 7105; 38 C.F.R. § 20.205. 4. With respect to the issue of entitlement to an initial rating in excess of 10 percent for chondromalacia of the right patella, the criteria for dismissal of an appeal have been met. 38 U.S.C. § 7105; 38 C.F.R. § 20.205. 5. With respect to the issue of entitlement to a TDIU, the criteria for dismissal of an appeal 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 from February 2006 to December 2009. He had service in Iraq, where his awards and decorations included the Combat Action Badge. He has had a 100 percent rating based on individual unemployability due to service-connected disability since February 15, 2011. 1. The Increased Rating for PTSD with Alcohol Dependence (previously evaluated as Anxiety Disorder) 2. The Earlier Effective Date for Service Connection for PTSD Issues 1 and 2: In October 2011, the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Regional Office (Agency of Original Jurisdiction (AOJ)) granted the Veteran’s claim for service connection for anxiety disorder, not otherwise specified and adjustment disorder with depressed mood (later characterized as PTSD). The AOJ assigned a 10 percent rating, effective February 15, 2011. The Veteran disagreed with that rating and effective date and appealed to the Board of Veterans’ Appeals (Board). In April 2016, the Board remanded the issue of entitlement to an effective date prior to February 15, 2011 for service connection for PTSD, as well as an inferred issue of entitlement to a TDIU. In March 2018, the Board granted a rating of 70 percent for the Veteran’s PTSD. The Board denied entitlement to an effective date prior to February 15, 2011 for service connection for PTSD. 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. § 20.205. Withdrawal may be made by the Veteran or by his authorized representative. 38 C.F.R. § 20.205. As noted above, in March 2018, the Board resolved the appeals for an increased rating and for an earlier effective date for PTSD. The Board notified the Veteran of those decisions, as well as his right to appeal to the United States Court of Appeals for Veteran’s Claims (Court). However, he did not file an appeal with the Court. Therefore, the Board’s decisions became final. 38 C.F.R. § 20.1100. There is no current appeal pending for Board consideration as to an increased rating for PTSD or an earlier effective date for the grant of service connection for PTSD. This further has been acknowledged by the Veteran’s representative. Correspondence received by VA on May 21, 2019, from the Veteran’s authorized representative noted in writing that the issues had been resolved. In the absence of an active appeal, and in light of the representative’s statement, there remain no allegations of errors of fact or law for appellate consideration. Accordingly, the Board does not have jurisdiction to review either appeal, and they are dismissed. 3. DJD with Sciatic Neuropathy In December 2011, the AOJ reduced the Veteran’s rating for his lumbar spine disability to 10 percent, effective March 1, 2012. The Veteran disagreed with that reduction and appealed to the Board. In April 2016, the Board restored the 20 percent rating for the Veteran’s degenerative joint disease of the lumbar spine with bilateral sciatic neuropathy. As above, the Veteran was notified of that decision but did not appeal to the Court. Therefore, the Board’s decision became final. 38 C.F.R. § 20.1100. There is no current appeal pending for Board consideration as to the issue of entitlement to restoration of a 20 percent rating for degenerative joint disease of the lumbar spine with bilateral sciatic neuropathy. This further has been acknowledged by the Veteran’s representative. Correspondence received by VA on May 21, 2019, from the Veteran’s authorized representative noted in writing that the issue had been resolved. In the absence of an active appeal, and in light of the representative’s statement, 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. 4. Chondromalacia of the right patella In October 2011, the AOJ denied the Veteran’s claim of entitlement to service connection for chondromalacia of the right patella. The Veteran disagreed with that decision and perfected an appeal to the Board. In April 2016, the Board granted the Veteran’s claim of entitlement to service connection for chondromalacia of the right patella. In August 2016, the AOJ granted a 10 percent rating for the Veteran’s chondromalacia of the right patella. The Veteran disagreed with that rating and appealed to the Board. In October 2018, the Board denied an initial rating in excess of 10 percent for chondromalacia of the right patella. The Veteran was notified of that decision but did not appeal to the Court. Therefore, the Board’s decision became final. 38 C.F.R. § 20.1100. There is no current appeal pending for Board consideration as to the issue a rating in excess of 10 percent for chondromalacia of the right patella. This further has been acknowledged by the Veteran’s representative. Correspondence received by VA on May 21, 2019, from the Veteran’s authorized representative noted in writing that the issues had been resolved. . In the absence of an active appeal, and in light of the representative’s statement, 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. 5. The TDIU In April 2016, the Board remanded an inferred issue of entitlement to a TDIU. In March 2018, the Board granted the Veteran entitlement to a TDIU. The Veteran was notified of that decision but did not appeal to the Court. Therefore, the Board’s decision became final. 38 C.F.R. § 20.1100. There is no current appeal on TDIU. This further has been acknowledged by the Veteran’s representative. Correspondence received by VA on May 21, 2019, from the Veteran’s authorized representative noted in writing that the issues had been resolved. In the absence of an active appeal, and in light of the representative’s statement, 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. C.A. SKOW Veterans Law Judge Board of Veterans’ Appeals Attorney for the Board Harold A. Beach, 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.