Citation Nr: 21064805 Decision Date: 10/21/21 Archive Date: 10/21/21 DOCKET NO. 17-43 784 DATE: October 21, 2021 ORDER The appeal seeking service connection for ulcers, or residuals thereof, is dismissed. FINDING OF FACT In August 2020, prior to the promulgation of a decision in the appeal, the Board received notification from the Veteran's attorney that a withdrawal of this appeal was requested. CONCLUSION OF LAW The criteria for withdrawal of an appeal seeking service connection for ulcers, or residuals thereof, by the appellant or his authorized representative have been met. 38 U.S.C. § 7105; 38 C.F.R. § 19.55. REASONS AND BASES FOR FINDING AND CONCLUSION The Veteran served on active duty from February 1992 to December 2012, including in the Southwest Asia theatre of operations for the Persian Gulf War, and he received medals and decorations including a Combat Action Badge. This matter comes before the Board of Veterans' Appeals (Board) on appeal from a May 2014 rating decision of the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Regional Office (RO). The claim was remanded for further development in April 2019. On review, the Board finds substantial compliance with its remand directives. See D'Aries v. Peake, 22 Vet. App. 97, 105 (2008) (holding that there must be substantial compliance with the terms of a Court or Board remand). Withdrawal of Appeal 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 An appeal may be withdrawn as to any or all issues involved in the appeal at any time before the Board promulgates a decision. 38 C.F.R. § 19.55. Withdrawal may be made by the appellant or by his or her authorized representative. Id. In Hembree v. Wilkie, the United States Court of Appeals for of Veterans Claims held that written withdrawals of an appeal are governed by the application regulations instead of DeLisio v. Shinseki, 25 Vet. App. 45, 57 (2011) (requiring a withdrawal to be explicit, unambiguous, and done with a full understanding of the consequences). See 33 Vet. App. 1, 7 (2020). The applicable regulation is 38 C.F.R. § 19.55, which requires that the withdrawal include the name of the appellant and the file number, and a statement that the appeal is withdrawn. See 38 C.F.R. § 19.55(b)(1). The Veteran or representative must also specify that the appeal is withdrawn in its entirety or list the issue(s) withdrawn from the appeal. Id. Under 38 C.F.R. § 19.55(c) withdrawal of an appeal will be deemed a withdrawal of the Notice of Disagreement as to all issues to which the withdrawal applies. In the present case, the appellant, through his duly appointed attorney, has withdrawn this appeal and, hence, there remain no allegations of errors of fact or law for appellate consideration. The Veteran's attorney submitted a fax on August 29, 2020, and contained therein was a cover page which noted, "Withdrawing Claim(s)," and a cover letter which stated, in part, "At this time, we would like to submit the following Statement in Support of Claim from the Veteran withdrawing their appeal for ulcer or ulcer residuals." In the accompanying statement in support of claim, the Veteran printed his name, his claim number, and noted under remarks, "Due to Rating decision 6/11/2020, I am satisfied with this decision and wish to withdraw any remaining appeals/claims I have open/pending including any remaining conditions that were denied in Supplement Statement of the Case 7/15/2020 (service connection for: ulcer and ulcer residuals). Thank you!" The statement was signed by the Veteran. Accordingly, the Board finds that the criteria for withdraw of this appeal have been met. Thus, the Board does not have jurisdiction to review the appeal and there remain no allegations of errors of fact or law for appellate consideration. The appeal is dismissed. S. B. MAYS Veterans Law Judge Board of Veterans' Appeals Attorney for the Board M. Moldawer, Associate 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.