Citation Nr: 21006985 Decision Date: 02/08/21 Archive Date: 02/08/21 DOCKET NO. 14-25 265A DATE: February 8, 2021 ORDER The appeal seeking entitlement to an initial evaluation in excess of 20 percent for radiculopathy of the right lower extremity is dismissed. The appeal seeking entitlement to an initial evaluation in excess of 10 percent prior to September 19, 2019, and in excess of 40 percent thereafter for intervertebral disc syndrome (IVDS) is dismissed. FINDINGS OF FACT 1. On December 28, 2020, prior to the promulgation of a decision on this appeal, the Board received notification from the Veteran that he would like to withdraw his appeal for entitlement to an initial evaluation in excess of 20 percent for radiculopathy of the right lower extremity. 2. On December 28, 2020, prior to the promulgation of a decision on this appeal, the Board received notification from the Veteran that he would like to withdraw his appeal for entitlement to an initial evaluation in excess of 10 percent prior to September 19, 2019, and in excess of 40 percent thereafter for intervertebral disc syndrome (IVDS). CONCLUSIONS OF LAW 1. The criteria for withdrawal of the appeal seeking entitlement to an initial evaluation in excess of 20 percent for radiculopathy of the right lower extremity by the appellant, through his authorized representative, have been met. 38 U.S.C. § 7105; 38 C.F.R. § 19.55. 2. The criteria for withdrawal of the appeal seeking entitlement to an initial evaluation in excess of 10 percent prior to September 19, 2019, and in excess of 40 percent thereafter for intervertebral disc syndrome (IVDS) by the appellant, through his authorized representative, have been met. 38 U.S.C. § 7105; 38 C.F.R. § 19.55. REASONS AND BASES FOR FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS The Veteran served on active duty from June 1987 to June 1991. This matter comes before the Board of Veterans’ Appeals (Board) on appeal from a June 2012 rating decision. The Veteran was afforded a hearing before the undersigned Veterans Law Judge in December 2018. In May 2019 and June 2020, the Board remanded the issues for further development. That development was completed, and the case has since been returned to the Board for appellate review. Increased Rating 1. Entitlement to an initial evaluation in excess of 20 percent for radiculopathy of the right lower extremity 2. Entitlement to an initial evaluation in excess of 10 percent prior to September 19, 2019, and in excess of 40 percent thereafter for intervertebral disc syndrome (IVDS) Only an appellant, or an appellant’s authorized representative may withdraw an appeal. 38 C.F.R. § 20.205 (a). An appeal may be withdrawn as to any or all issues involved in the appeal. Id. Appeal withdrawals must include the name of the Veteran, the applicable file number, and a statement that the appeal is withdrawn. 38 C.F.R. § 20.205 (b)(1). Appeal withdrawals should be filed with the Board and an appeal withdrawal is effective when received by the Board. 38 C.F.R. § 20.205 (b)(2)-(3). Withdrawal of an appeal will be deemed a withdrawal of the Notice of Disagreement as to all issues to which the withdrawal applies. 38 C.F.R. § 20.205(c). On December 28, 2020, the Board received a letter from the Veteran’s representative stating the Veteran wishes to withdraw the issues of entitlement to an increased evaluation for radiculopathy of the right lower extremity and entitlement to an initial evaluation in excess of 10 percent prior to September 19, 2019, and in excess of 40 percent thereafter for IVDS. The Veteran’s representative included the Veteran’s name and file number in the withdrawal letter in accordance with 38 C.F.R. § 20.205 (b)(1). As the Veteran has withdrawn his appeal as to these issues, there remain no allegations of error of fact or law for appellate consideration. Accordingly, the Board does not have jurisdiction to review the Veteran’s appeal as to these claims and they are dismissed. TANYA SMITH Veterans Law Judge Board of Veterans’ Appeals Attorney for the Board Alexia E. Palacios-Peters, 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.