Citation Nr: 21064119
Decision Date: 10/19/21	Archive Date: 10/19/21

DOCKET NO. 18-41 063
DATE: October 19, 2021

ORDER

1. Compensation under 38 U.S.C. § 1151 for lithium toxicity causing renal failure is dismissed.

2. A pension is dismissed.

3. A special monthly pension (SMP) is dismissed.

 

FINDING OF FACT

In May 2021, prior to the promulgation of a Board decision, the Veteran withdrew the appeal.

CONCLUSION OF LAW

The criteria for withdrawal of the appeal are met.  38 U.S.C. § 7105; 38 C.F.R. § 20.205.

REASONS AND BASES FOR FINDING AND CONCLUSION

The Veteran served on active duty from August 1987 to August 1991.

The case is on appeal from a September 2015 rating decision.

The Veteran requested a Board hearing in an August 2018 VA Form 9.  However, in a May 2021 statement, the Veteran's attorney representative requested that the hearing be cancelled.  Therefore, the hearing request is considered withdrawn.  See 38 C.F.R. § 20.704(e).

1. Compensation under 38 U.S.C. § 1151 for lithium toxicity causing renal failure.

2. A pension.

3. A SMP.

Under 38 U.S.C. § 7105, the Board may dismiss any appeal which fails to allege specific error of fact or law in the determination being appealed.  An appeal may be withdrawn by the Veteran or representative at any time before the Board promulgates a decision.  38 C.F.R. § 19.55.

In May 2021, the Veteran's attorney representative submitted a statement.  In doing so, the attorney representative stated that the Veteran "expressed his desire to withdraw his legacy appeal issues for entitlement to compensation under 38 U.S.C. § 1151 for lithium toxicity causing renal failure and for the issues of special monthly compensation and non-service connected pension."  He also stated that "we request that the hearing be cancelled and these particular appeal issues to be withdrawn."

The Board finds that the Veteran's withdrawal of the issues on appeal is "explicit, unambiguous, and done with a full understanding of the consequences of such action on the part of the claimant."  DeLisio v. Shinseki, 25 Vet. App. 45, 57 (2011); see also Acree v O'Rourke, 891 F.3d 1009 (Fed. Cir. 2018).  In this regard, the Veteran's attorney representative stated, in writing, that the Veteran wants to withdrawal the legacy appeal.  He also requested that the specific issues appealed be withdrawn.

Therefore, there remain no allegations of errors of fact or law for appellate consideration with regard to this appeal.  Accordingly, the Board does not have jurisdiction to review the appeal and it is dismissed.

 

 

RYAN T. KESSEL

Veterans Law Judge

Board of Veterans' Appeals

Attorney for the Board	Jimerfield, David

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.