Citation Nr: 21072579 Decision Date: 12/03/21 Archive Date: 12/03/21 DOCKET NO. 18-20 790 DATE: December 3, 2021 ORDER The issue of entitlement to apportionment of the Veteran's VA disability compensation benefits is dismissed. FINDING OF FACT The appellant explicitly, unambiguously, and with a full understanding of the consequences, withdrew her appeal as to the issue of apportionment of the Veteran's VA disability compensation benefits. CONCLUSION OF LAW The criteria for withdrawal of entitlement to apportionment of the Veteran's VA disability compensation benefits 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 June 2006 to July 2013. The appellant is the Veteran's spouse and mother of the parties' minor child. This matter comes to the Board of Veterans' Appeals (Board) on appeal from a May 2017 apportionment decision issued by the Department of Veterans' Affairs (VA) Regional Office (RO). In November 2021, the appellant testified at a hearing before the undersigned Veterans Law Judge. This case is being processed under the Board's One-Touch Initiative. A transcript of the hearing will be associated with the claims file at a later time. The Board has limited the discussion below to the relevant evidence required to support its finding of fact and conclusion of law, as well as to the specific contentions regarding the case as raised directly by the Veteran and those reasonably raised by the record. See Scott v. McDonald, 789 F.3d 1375, 1381 (Fed. Cir. 2015); Robinson v. Peake, 21 Vet. App. 545, 552 (2008). The issue of entitlement to apportionment of the Veteran's VA disability compensation benefits is dismissed. An appeal may be withdrawn as to any or all issues involved in the appeal at any time before the Board promulgates a decision. 38 C.F.R. § 20.205.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 appellant or by his or her authorized representative. 38 C.F.R. §§ 19.55, 20.205. 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. In DeLisio v. Shinseki, the Court provided the requirements for a valid oral withdrawal of an appeal or an issue on appeal. 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 appellant. Delisio v. Shinseki, 25 Vet. App. 45, 57 (2011). During the November 2021 Board videoconference hearing, the appellant withdrew from appeal the issue of entitlement to apportionment of the Veteran's VA disability compensation benefits. She stated that she wanted to withdraw the appeal as to the issue of apportionment of the Veteran's VA disability compensation benefits. She was advised of the consequences of the withdrawal request, and she confirmed she understood said consequences. The Board finds the appellant's withdrawal was explicit, unambiguous, and done with a full understanding of the consequences. Thus, the Board finds the Veteran's withdrawal of this issue at the hearing meets the requirements of Delisio. Consequently, this issue is dismissed as there remains no allegation of error of fact or law for appellate consideration. 38 U.S.C. § 7105. SHEREEN M. MARCUS Veterans Law Judge Board of Veterans' Appeals Attorney for the Board A.C. Allen, 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.