Citation Nr: 21062678 Decision Date: 10/08/21 Archive Date: 10/08/21 DOCKET NO. 18-02 774 DATE: October 8, 2021 ORDER The issue as to whether the reduction of the Veteran's service-connected residuals of prostate cancer from 100 percent to 40 percent, from June 1, 2015, was proper and whether a rating in excess of 40 percent for service-connected residuals of prostate cancer is dismissed. Entitlement to a rating in excess of 30 percent for service-connected fecal incontinence is dismissed. FINDING OF FACT At the October 2021 hearing, prior to the promulgation of an appellate decision, the Veteran stated that he wished to withdraw his appeal as to whether the reduction of his service-connected residuals of prostate cancer was valid and for increased ratings for his service-connected residuals of prostate cancer and for his service-connected fecal incontinence. CONCLUSIONS OF LAW 1. The criteria for withdrawal of the issue of whether the reduction of the Veteran's service-connected residuals of prostate cancer from 100 percent to 40 percent, from June 1, 2015, was proper, and for an increased rating for service-connected residuals of prostate cancer by the Veteran have been met. 38 U.S.C. § 7105 (2018); 38 C.F.R. § 20.205 (2020). 2. The criteria for withdrawal of the issue of an increased rating for service-connected fecal incontinence by the Veteran have been met. 38 U.S.C. § 7105 (2018); 38 C.F.R. § 20.205 (2020). REASONS AND BASES FOR FINDING AND CONCLUSIONS The Veteran served honorably on active duty in the United States Army from June 1964 to May 1967. This matter comes to the Board of Veterans' Appeals (Board) on appeal from a March 2015 rating decision issued by a Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Regional Office. In October 2021, the Veteran testified at a virtual hearing before the undersigned. Dismissal of Claim 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 An appeal may be withdrawn as to any or all issues involved in the appeal at any time before the Board promulgates a decision. 38 C.F.R. § 20.205.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 or her authorized representative. 38 C.F.R. § 20.205. Except for appeals withdrawn on the record at a hearing, withdrawal must be in writing. 38 C.F.R. § 20.205(b)(1). A withdrawal is effective when received provided that receipt is prior to the issuance of a decision by the Board. 38 C.F.R. § 20.205(b)(3). Withdrawal of a claim constitutes a withdrawal of the notice of disagreement (NOD) and, if filed, the substantive appeal. 38 C.F.R. § 20.205(c). There is no obligation to proceed with further adjudication following withdrawal. Hanson v. Brown, 9 Vet. App. 29 (1996). In DeLisio v. Shinseki, the Court provided the requirements for a valid oral withdrawal of an appeal or an issue on appeal done during a hearing. The Court held a valid oral withdrawal must be: (1) explicit, (2) unambiguous, and (3) done with a full understanding of the consequences of such action by the Veteran. Delisio v. Shinseki, 25 Vet. App. 45, 57 (2011). In October 2021, the Veteran testified that he wished to withdraw claim. The undersigned explained that consequent to the withdrawal the issues would be dismissed with no determination on the merits; however, he could file a new claim for increased rating at a later time if he wished to do so. The Veteran confirmed he understood the consequences of the withdrawal. The Veteran confirmed that his withdrawal of the issues was explicit, unambiguous, and done with a full understanding of the consequences of such action. The Board finds that the Veteran effectively withdrew the issues from the appeal. The statement that the Veteran wished to withdraw the issues will be included in the hearing transcript. Accordingly, the Veteran's withdrawal is in compliance with 38 C.F.R. § 20.205(b)(1). When a pending appeal is withdrawn, there is no longer an allegation of error of fact or law with respect to the determination that had been previously appealed. Consequently, dismissal of the issues is the appropriate disposition. See 38 U.S.C. § 7105(d). E. I. VELEZ Veterans Law Judge Board of Veterans' Appeals Attorney for the Board R. Gandhi, 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.