Citation Nr: 21076172
Decision Date: 12/22/21	Archive Date: 12/22/21

DOCKET NO. 16-34 629
DATE: December 22, 2021

ORDER

Entitlement to service connection for a vision loss disability, to include as secondary to service-connected migraine headaches disability, has been withdrawn.

Entitlement to a total rating based on individual unemployability (TDIU) due to service-connected disabilities has been withdrawn.

FINDINGS OF FACT

1. Prior to the promulgation of a decision in this appeal, the Veteran, through her representative, expressed her wish to withdraw the issue of entitlement to service connection for a vision loss disability, to include as secondary to service-connected migraine headaches disability.

2. Prior to the promulgation of a decision in this appeal, the Veteran, through her representative, expressed her wish to withdraw the issue of entitlement to a TDIU due to service-connected disabilities. 

CONCLUSIONS OF LAW

1. The criteria for withdrawal of entitlement to service connection for a vision loss disability, to include as secondary to service-connected migraine headaches disability, by the Veteran (or the authorized representative) have been met.  38 U.S.C. § 7105; 38 C.F.R. § 20.205.

2. The criteria for withdrawal of entitlement to TDIU due to service-connected disabilities by the Veteran (or the authorized representative) have been met.  38 U.S.C. § 7105; 38 C.F.R. § 20.205.

REASONS AND BASES FOR FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS

The Veteran served on active duty from January 2008 to December 2011. 

This matter is before the Board of Veterans' Appeals (Board) on appeal of a March 2013 rating decision of Regional Offices (RO) of the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA).

The Veteran appeared at a hearing before the undersigned Veterans Law Judge in September 2019.  In January 2020 and March 2021, the Board remanded, in part, the two issues noted above for further development.  Stegall v. West, 11 Vet. App. 268, 271 (1998).

In addition to the two issues on the cover page, in March 2021, the Board remanded the issues of entitlement to service connection for a foot disability, to include as secondary to service-connected bilateral knee disabilities, entitlement to service connection for a left ankle disability, to include as secondary to service-connected bilateral knee disabilities, entitlement to service connection for a bilateral shoulder disability, to include as secondary to service-connected bilateral knee disabilities and entitlement to service connection for a bilateral hip disability, to include as secondary to service-connected bilateral knee disabilities.  Subsequently, in a June 2021 rating decision, the RO granted service connection for a bilateral foot disability, for a left ankle disability, for a bilateral shoulder disability, and for a bilateral hip disability.  As the Veteran has not appealed either the evaluations or effective dates assigned to these disabilities, these matters are not before the Board.   See Grantham v. Brown, 114 F.3d 1156 (Fed. Cir. 1997).

Entitlement to service connection for a vision loss disability, to include as secondary to service-connected migraine headaches disability, and entitlement to TDIU due to service-connected disabilities are dismissed. 

The Board may dismiss any appeal that 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. § 20.204.  Withdrawal may be made by the appellant or by his or her authorized representative.  38 C.F.R. § 20.204.

In a November 2021 correspondence, the Veteran and her representative requested to withdraw the issues of entitlement to service connection for a vision loss disability, to include as secondary to service-connected migraine headaches disability, and entitlement to TDIU due to service-connected disabilities.  As such, there remain no allegations of errors of fact or law for appellate consideration.  The Board does not have jurisdiction to review her appeal as to these two issues, and the Veteran's claims must be dismissed.

 

 

A. C. MACKENZIE

Veterans Law Judge

Board of Veterans' Appeals

Attorney for the Board	Evans, A-L

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.