Citation Nr: 21005618 Decision Date: 02/02/21 Archive Date: 02/02/21 DOCKET NO. 12-27 570A DATE: February 2, 2021 ORDER The appeal of the claim for service connection for a stomach ulcer is dismissed. The appeal of the claim for service connection for sciatica is dismissed. REMANDED An initial compensable disability rating for status-post left knee anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction prior to May 7, 2012, and a rating in excess of 10 percent since that date, is remanded. An initial compensable disability rating for left leg neuropathy prior to December 9, 2015, and a rating in excess of 10 percent since that date, is remanded. FINDING OF FACT In November 2020, after certification of the appeal to the Board and prior to the promulgation of a decision, the Veteran requested that the appeal of the claims for service connection for a stomach ulcer and sciatica be withdrawn. CONCLUSIONS OF LAW 1. The criteria for withdrawal of the appeal for entitlement to service connection for a stomach ulcer have been met. 38 U.S.C. § 7105; 38 C.F.R. § 19.55. 2. The criteria for withdrawal of the appeal for entitlement to service connection for sciatica have been met. 38 U.S.C. § 7105; 38 C.F.R. § 19.55. REASONS AND BASES FOR FINDING AND CONCLUSIONS The Veteran served on active duty from October 2005 to April 2009 in the United States Army. These matters come before the Board of Veterans' Appeals (Board) on appeal from a September 2009 rating decision of the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Regional Office (RO). In November 2020, the Veteran testified before the undersigned during a virtual hearing. A transcript of the hearing is included in the electronic claims file. Dismissal 1. The appeal of the claim for service connection for a stomach ulcer is dismissed. 2. The appeal of the claim for service connection for sciatica is dismissed. The Board may dismiss any appeal which fails to allege specific errors of fact or law in the determination being appealed. An appeal may be withdrawn as to any or all issues involved in the appeal at any time before the Board promulgates a decision. Withdrawal may be made by the appellant or by his or her authorized representative. 38 U.S.C. § 7105; 38 C.F.R. § 19.55. During the November 2020 Board hearing, the Veteran explicitly, unambiguously, and with a full understanding of the consequences, withdrew his appeal of the claims for service connection for a stomach ulcer and sciatica. See Hearing Transcript, pp. 9-10. He testified that he was withdrawing the claims because he does not have current disabilities of a stomach ulcer or sciatica, as required to substantiate the claims for service connection. The undersigned explained that withdrawing the claims meant that they would be dismissed and would not be decided among the other claims in the present appeal. He noted that the Veteran could, however, seek service connection again in the future if desired. The Veteran, represented by the California Department of Veteran’s Affairs at the hearing, confirmed his understanding of the impact of a dismissal and his desire to proceed with withdrawing the claims. The record thus demonstrates that the consequences of the withdrawals were fully understood. See Acree v. O’Rourke, 891 F.3d 1009 (Fed. Cir. 2018). Hence, there remain no allegations of errors of fact or law for appellate consideration. Accordingly, the Board does not have jurisdiction to review the claims for service connection for a stomach ulcer or sciatica, and they are dismissed. REASONS FOR REMAND 1. An initial compensable disability rating for status-post left knee ACL reconstruction prior to May 7, 2012, and a rating in excess of 10 percent since that date, is remanded. 2. An initial compensable disability rating for left leg neuropathy prior to December 9, 2015, and a rating in excess of 10 percent since that date, is remanded. At the November 2020 hearing, the Veteran testified that he had recently moved from California to Washington, and established VA care in Washington in approximately 2019. The claims file currently contains VA treatment records dated only through 2016, and all were generated from VA facilities in California. The Veteran’s outstanding VA treatment records must be obtained prior to appellate adjudication. Additionally, updated VA examinations are needed for the claims. The Veteran last underwent VA examinations for his service-connected left knee disability and associated neurological impairment in 2015. At the hearing, he testified regarding symptomatology that may support the assignment of a higher rating for his left knee disability. Specifically, he testified that while he could bend his left knee to 90 degrees, he was unable to bring his heel back further without support from his hand. He also reported increased pain and functional impairments of the left knee since his last VA examination. See Snuffer v. Gober, 10 Vet. App. 400, 403 (1997). With regard to his left leg neuropathy, as the Veteran testified regarding increased numbness and tingling extending from his leg to his small toe, and given the length of time that has passed since his last examination, on remand an updated VA examination should also be provided for this claim. Moreover, as VA examination findings pertaining to the left knee may contain information impacting the adjudication of the claim for a higher rating for left leg neuropathy under the applicable diagnostic code, the issues are inextricably intertwined. The matters are REMANDED for the following action: 1. Contact the Veteran and ask him to identify the locations of any VA treatment he has received in the state of Washington. Thereafter, obtain any outstanding VA treatment records pertaining to the Veteran from all indicated VA medical facilities in the state of Washington. 2. Afford the Veteran a VA examination to ascertain the current severity of his status-post left knee ACL reconstruction in accordance with the applicable worksheet for rating the disability. (Continued on the next page)   3. Afford the Veteran a VA examination to ascertain the current severity of his left leg neuropathy in accordance with the applicable worksheet for rating the disability. M. Tenner Veterans Law Judge Board of Veterans’ Appeals Attorney for the Board J. Smith, 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.