Citation Nr: 21014211 Decision Date: 03/11/21 Archive Date: 03/11/21 DOCKET NO. 14-01 114 DATE: March 11, 2021 ORDER Entitlement to an evaluation in excess of 50 percent prior to December 3, 2020, and in excess of 70 percent on and after that date for service-connected anxiety disorder not otherwise specified is dismissed. FINDING OF FACT On February 13, 2021, prior to the promulgation of a decision in the appeal, the Board received notification from the Veteran that a withdrawal of this appeal is requested. CONCLUSION OF LAW The criteria for withdrawal of entitlement to an evaluation in excess of 50 percent prior to December 3, 2020, and in excess of 70 percent on and after that date for service-connected anxiety disorder not otherwise specified by the appellant (or his or her authorized representative) have been met. 38 U.S.C. § 7105 (2012); 38 C.F.R. § 19.55 (2019). REASONS AND BASES FOR FINDING AND CONCLUSION The Veteran served on active duty from March 1973 to December 1974. This case comes before the Board of Veterans’ Appeals (Board) on appeal from a February 2012 rating decision of the Department of Veteran Affairs (VA) Regional Office (RO). The Veteran testified before the undersigned Veterans Law Judge in a November 2016 hearing. This issue was previously before the Board in May 2018 and July 2020, each time remanded for further development. That development was completed, and the case has since been returned to the Board for appellate review. While on remand, in a January 2021 rating decision, the RO granted an evaluation of 70 percent for the service-connected anxiety disorder not otherwise specified, effective December 3, 2020. 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. An appeal may be withdrawn as to any or all issues involved in the appeal at any time before the Board promulgates a decision. 38 C.F.R. § 20.205.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. § 20.205. If in writing, the withdrawal must include the file number and a statement that the appeal is withdrawn. 38 C.F.R. § 20.204, is controlling. “When the Board must analyze whether a written withdrawal is effective, its chief questions are whether the written withdrawal falls under § 20.204(b) and, if so, whether it complies with that regulation's requirements. If the answer to both questions is yes, then that is generally the end of the matter.” Hembree v. Wilkie, 33 Vet. App. 1, 7 (2020). Thus, if the written withdrawal is itself ambiguous, the Board may need to consider other evidence and left open the question whether any post-withdrawal information could call the propriety of that withdrawal into question. Hembree, 33 Vet. App. at 7. On February 13, 2021, the Board received an Appeals Satisfaction Notice form following the issuance of the January 2021 Supplemental Statement of the Case. The notice form indicated that based on the January 2021 rating decision, he was satisfied and wished to withdraw the appeal. He signed and dated the form to February 10, 2021. The envelope includes a postmark date also of February 10, 2021. On February 16, 2021, the Board received statements from the Veteran and his wife asserting increased evaluations for both the service-connected migraine headaches denied in the July 2020 Board decision, and the present service-connected anxiety disorder claim. The Veteran’s statement was dated February 9, 2021, and the Veteran’s wife statement was undated. The envelope includes a postmark date also of February 9, 2021. Although the withdrawal notice was received by the Board prior to the statements arguing for an increased evaluation, based on the date on the documents, and the postmark dates on the envelopes, the Veteran mailed the withdrawal notice after he mailed the statements. Thus, the Board finds the criteria of 38 C.F.R. § 20.204 are met. There remains no allegations of errors of fact or law for appellate consideration. Accordingly, the Board does not have jurisdiction to review the appeal and it is dismissed. K. MILLIKAN Veterans Law Judge Board of Veterans’ Appeals Attorney for the Board J. Rogos 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.