Citation Nr: 21067282
Decision Date: 11/03/21	Archive Date: 11/03/21

DOCKET NO. 18-37 858
DATE: November 3, 2021

ORDER

1. The appeal concerning the issue of entitlement to an initial evaluation in excess of 40 percent for right upper extremity weakness, as a residual of a stroke, is dismissed.

2. The appeal concerning the issue of entitlement to an initial evaluation in excess of 10 percent for speech dysfluency, dysarthria, and stuttering, as a residual of a stroke, is dismissed.

FINDINGS OF FACT

Prior to the promulgation of a decision in the appeal, in February 2021 correspondence, the Veteran withdrew his appeal concerning the issues of entitlement to increased initial ratings for right upper extremity weakness and speech dysfluency, dysarthria, and stuttering. 

CONCLUSIONS OF LAW

1. The criteria for withdrawal of an appeal by the Veteran regarding the issue of entitlement to entitlement to an initial evaluation in excess of 40 percent for right upper extremity weakness, as a residual of a stroke, have been met. 38 U.S.C. § 7105(b)(2), (d)(5) (2012); 38 C.F.R. §§ 20.202, 20.204 (2020).

2. The criteria for withdrawal of an appeal by the Veteran regarding the issue of entitlement to initial evaluation in excess of 10 percent for speech dysfluency, dysarthria, and stuttering, as a residual of a stroke, have been met. 38 U.S.C. § 7105(b)(2), (d)(5) (2012); 38 C.F.R. §§ 20.202, 20.204 (2020).

REASONS AND BASES FOR FINDING AND CONCLUSIONS

The Veteran served on active duty from April 1981 to June 1984.

These matters come to the Board of Veterans' Appeals (Board) on appeal from a rating decision issued by the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) RO.

The Board notes that the issue of entitlement to an increased rating for central visual field defect, as a residual of a stroke, was previously remanded. An October 2020 rating decision granted a 100 percent rating July 5, 2005, the date of service connection for this condition. As this represents a full grant of the benefits sought, the issue is no longer in appellate status. See Grantham v. Brown, 114 F. 3d 1156, 1158 (Fed. Cir. 1997). 

Withdrawal

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. Except for appeals withdrawn on the record at a hearing, appeal withdrawals must be in writing. A substantive appeal may be withdrawn at any time before the Board promulgates a decision. 38 C.F.R. § 20.204. Withdrawal may be made by the Veteran or by his or her authorized representative. 38 C.F.R. § 20.204. 

(Continued on the next page)

 

In February 2021 correspondence, the Veteran, through his attorney, knowingly, explicitly, and unambiguously withdrew his appeal concerning the issues of entitlement to increased ratings for right upper extremity weakness and speech dysfluency, dysarthria, and stuttering. Hence, there remain no allegations of errors of fact or law for appellate consideration regarding these issues. Accordingly, the Board does not have jurisdiction to review these issues and they are dismissed.

 

 

MICHAEL KILCOYNE

Veterans Law Judge

Board of Veterans' Appeals

Attorney for the Board	Erin J. Trojanowski, 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.