Citation Nr: 21025222 Decision Date: 04/27/21 Archive Date: 04/27/21 DOCKET NO. 18-53 025 DATE: April 27, 2021 ORDER Entitlement to an evaluation in excess of 10 percent prior to January 28, 2021, and in excess of 40 percent, thereafter, for a service-connected residuals of prostate cancer, status post laparoscopic robotic assisted radical prostatectomy with erectile dysfunction (hereinafter, service-connected residuals of prostate cancer), to include the propriety of the reduction from 100 percent to 10 percent, effective from November 1, 2016, is dismissed. FINDING OF FACT In an Appeals Satisfaction Notice received by the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) in March 2021, the Veteran expressed satisfaction with concurrently issued February 2021 Decision Review Officer (DRO) decision and Supplemental Statement of the Case (SSOC) which partially granted his appeal for an increased evaluation for service-connected residuals of prostate cancer and requested to withdraw his appeal regarding further entitlement. CONCLUSION OF LAW The criteria for withdrawal of the issue of entitlement to an evaluation in excess of 10 percent prior to January 28, 2021, and in excess of 40 percent, thereafter, for a service-connected residuals of prostate cancer, status post laparoscopic robotic assisted radical prostatectomy with erectile dysfunction (hereinafter, service-connected residuals of prostate cancer), to include the propriety of the reduction from 100 percent to 10 percent, effective from November 1, 2016, have been met. 38 U.S.C. § 7105; 38 C.F.R. §§ 20.202, 20.204. REASONS AND BASES FOR FINDING AND CONCLUSION The Veteran served on active duty in the United States Marine Corps from February 1964 to February 1967, to include in the Republic of Vietnam. He is in receipt of a Bronze Star Medal. This matter comes to the Board of Veterans' Appeals (Board) from an August 2016 rating decision by a VA Regional Office (RO) of the Veterans Benefits Administration (VBA), which is the Agency of Original Jurisdiction (AOJ). The Veteran expressed timely disagreement with this determination, and the present appeal ensued. In September 2020, the Veteran and his wife testified at a Board hearing conducted by the undersigned Veterans Law Judge (VLJ) via videoconferencing equipment. A transcript of the September 2020 hearing is associated with the file. In December 2020, the Board remanded the Veteran’s appeal to ensure that VA fulfilled its duty to assist the Veteran in substantiating his appeal. The Board’s remand directives have been substantially completed. In a February 2021 DRO decision, the AOJ, among other actions, partially granted the Veteran’s appeal seeking an increased evaluation for service-connected residuals of prostate cancer; the 10 percent evaluation was increased to 40 percent, effective from January 28, 2021. A concurrently-issued SSOC denied further entitlement. This partial allowance resulted in a “staged” evaluation, and the issue remained in appellate status. Hart v. Mansfield, 21 Vet. App. 505 (2007); AB v. Brown, 6 Vet. App. 35, 38-39 (1993). The Veteran’s appealed issue has been recharacterized to reflect the above actions. 1. Entitlement to an evaluation in excess of 10 percent prior to January 28, 2021, and in excess of 40 percent, thereafter, for a service-connected residuals of prostate cancer, to include the propriety of the reduction from 100 percent to 10 percent, effective from November 1, 2016, is dismissed. 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. Except for appeals withdrawn on the record at the time of a hearing, appeal withdrawals must be in writing. 38 C.F.R. §20.204. An appeal may be withdrawn as to any or all issues involved in the appeal at any time before the Board promulgates a decision. Id. Withdrawal may be made by the appellant or by his or her authorized representative. Id. After the AOJ concurrently issued the February 2021 DRO decision and SSOC, the Veteran submitted an Appeals Satisfaction Notice in March 2021, stating that he received the recent correspondence regarding these readjudications, was satisfied with the partial allowance outlined in the decisions, and wished to withdraw all remaining issues associated with the appeal. In light of above, the Veteran's withdrawal is effective upon the date of its receipt in March 2021. 38 C.F.R. §20.204(b)(3). The Board finds that the language used in the March 2021 Appeals Satisfaction Notice is clear and unambiguous, and it is indicative of an informed and purposeful decision. DeLisio v. Shinseki, 25 Vet. App 45 (2011). There remains no allegation of errors of fact or law for appellate consideration. Accordingly, the Board does not have jurisdiction to review the Veteran's appeal, and it is dismissed. Michael J. Skaltsounis Veterans Law Judge Board of Veterans’ Appeals Attorney for the Board Scott W. Dale, 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.