Citation Nr: 21073159
Decision Date: 12/07/21	Archive Date: 12/07/21

DOCKET NO. 17-26 812
DATE: December 7, 2021

ORDER

The application to reopen the claim for entitlement to service connection for chronic fatigue syndrome (CFS) is dismissed.

FINDING OF FACT

In August 2017, prior to promulgation of a decision in the appeal, the Veteran notified VA that he wished to withdraw his appeal.

CONCLUSION OF LAW

The criteria for withdrawal of an appeal 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 November 1984 to June 1985, and from December 1990 to May 1991.

This case comes before the Board of Veterans' Appeals (Board) on appeal from a March 2017 rating decision by the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Regional Office (RO) which, inter alia, denied reopening the claim of service connection for CFS.  The Veteran disagreed with the RO's determination and a statement of the case was issued in April 2017 addressing the matter.  The Veteran timely appealed in May 2017.

Withdrawal of Appeal

The Board may dismiss any appeal which fails to identify the specific determination with which the claimant disagrees.  38 U.S.C. § 7105(d).  An appeal may be withdrawn as to any or all issues involved in the appeal. 38 C.F.R. § 19.55 (a).  Withdrawal may be made by the appellant or by his or her authorized representative. Id.

In an August 2017 written statement, the Veteran indicated that he wished to withdraw his appeal with respect to the issue of reopening the claim of entitlement to service connection for CFS.  This statement constitutes a valid withdrawal of the Veteran's appeal as it complied with the requirement of the applicable regulation by including the name of the Veteran, the applicable VA file number, and a statement that the appeal was withdrawn.  See Hembree v. Wilkie, 33 Vet. App. 1, 8 (2020) (written withdrawals need only comply with 38 C.F.R. § 20.204 (b), now 38 C.F.R. § 19.55(b) as applicable to legacy claims).

(Continued on the next page)

 

Based on the above, there is no specific determination with which the claimant disagrees, and dismissal is therefore warranted.

 

 

Jonathan Hager

Veterans Law Judge

Board of Veterans' Appeals

Attorney for the Board	R. Walker, 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 This decision is not precedential and does not establish VA policies or interpretations of general applicability. 38 C.F.R. § 20.1303.