Citation Nr: 21062586 Decision Date: 10/08/21 Archive Date: 10/08/21 DOCKET NO. 20-00 998 DATE: October 8, 2021 ORDER The issue of entitlement to an effective date earlier than February 8, 2012, for an award of a total disability rating based on individual unemployability due to service-connected disability (TDIU) is dismissed. The issue of entitlement to an effective date earlier than February 8, 2012, for basic eligibility for Dependents' Educational Assistance (DEA) benefits under Chapter 35, Title 38, United States Code is dismissed. FINDING OF FACT In a correspondence received in April 2021, prior to the promulgation of a decision in the appeal, the Veteran requested to withdraw all issues on appeal. CONCLUSIONS OF LAW 1. The criteria for withdrawal of the issue of entitlement to an effective date earlier than February 8, 2012, for an award of a total disability rating based on TDIU by the appellant have been met. 38 U.S.C. § 7105; 38 C.F.R. § 19.55. 2. The criteria for withdrawal of the issue of entitlement to an effective date earlier than February 8, 2012, for basic eligibility for Dependents' Educational Assistance (DEA) benefits under Chapter 35, Title 38, United States Code by the appellant have been met. 38 U.S.C. § 7105; 38 C.F.R. § 19.55. REASONS AND BASES FOR FINDING AND CONCLUSIONS The Veteran served on active duty in the United States Army from April 1967 to January 1970. For his meritorious service, the Veteran was awarded (among other decorations) the Vietnam Service and Campaign Medals. This matter is before the Board of Veterans' Appeal (Board) on appeal from an August 2018 rating decision issued by the Department of Veteran Affairs (VA) Regional Office (RO). An appellant may withdraw an appeal in writing or on the record at a hearing on appeal at any time before the Board promulgates a final decision. 38 C.F.R. § 19.55. When an appellant does so, the withdrawal effectively creates a situation where there no longer exists any allegation of error of fact or law for the Board to decide. Consequently, in such an instance, the Board does not have jurisdiction to review the appeal, and the appropriate action by the Board is dismissal. 38 U.S.C. §§ 7104, 7105(d). In March 2021, the Board granted the Veteran's claim for a TDIU prior to February 8, 2012. A March 2021 rating decision implemented the March 2021 Board decision by awarding the Veteran TDIU and DEA benefits, effective May 2, 2011. There are two independent bases for dismissing the Veteran's claims currently before the Board. First, the March 2021 Board decision essentially extinguished the Veteran's claims. That earlier decision had an earlier docket number (dated from 2013) corresponding with an earlier appeal. The appeal at bar with a 2020 docket number was established following the issuance of a Statement of the Case regarding these same issues that was issued in November 2019. Though styled as a SOC, it should have been a Supplemental Statement of the Case, as it was issued in response to an earlier Board remand corresponding with the 2013 docket date. Regardless, the issues before the Board as part of this claim with the 2020 docket number were resolved by the issuance of the Board's March 2021 decision. Second, in April 2021, the Veteran's attorney wrote to both withdraw her power of attorney to serve as the Veteran's representative and to withdraw the issues before the Board. Specifically, the Veteran's attorney wrote that "there has been favorable resolution of [the] claim," and stated that "[t]his claim may be closed." Because this request to withdraw as the Veteran's attorney came more than 90 days after the case was certified to the Board, the Board will consider the Veteran's attorney to still be associated with the case for the purposes of this appeal. A withdrawal may be requested from an appellant or an appellant's authorized representative. 38 C.F.R. § 19.55 (pertaining to withdrawals of legacy appeals). To be valid, such withdrawals must contain the name of the veteran, the Veteran's file number, and a statement that the appeal is withdrawn. Here, the Veteran's attorney's April 2021 letter meets these criteria. That letter contained the Veteran's name, his file number, and clear statements expressing a desire to withdraw any remaining appeals (again, the Veteran's attorney noted the favorable resolution of the claims and asked that the claim be closed). Though the word withdrawal was not used in conjunction with the actual request to withdraw the Veteran's claims, the attorney's language is sufficiently clear to glean the request to withdraw all remaining claims before the Board. Finally, there has been no communication from the Veteran or the Veteran's attorney that would call into question the propriety or the validity of the April 2021 request to withdraw the claim. Stated another way, the evidence here shows both that the claims on appeal have already been resolved in a separate, final Board decision, and that the Veteran (through his attorney) has sought to withdraw any remaining issues before the Board. The Board is appreciative to the Veteran for his service, including his service in the Republic of Vietnam. As the claims at bar have already been addressed or, in the alternative, have been withdrawn, there remain no errors of fact or law for the Board to address. These issues therefore must be dismissed. Evan M. Deichert Veterans Law Judge Board of Veterans' Appeals Attorney for the Board J.R. Higgins 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.