Citation Nr: 21027312 Decision Date: 05/05/21 Archive Date: 05/05/21 DOCKET NO. 17-04 315 DATE: May 5, 2021 ORDER Entitlement to a rating in of 20 percent for lumbosacral strain for the period prior to August 25, 2020, and in excess of 40 percent thereafter is dismissed. Entitlement to a compensable rating for right hip strain, limitation of extension is dismissed. Entitlement to a rating in excess of 20 percent for residuals, fractured right 5th metatarsal is dismissed. Entitlement to a compensable rating for right hip strain, limitation of abduction, adduction or rotation for the period prior to August 25, 2020, and in excess of 20 percent thereafter is dismissed. Entitlement to a rating in excess of 10 percent for right hip strain, limitation of flexion for the period prior to August 25, 2020, and in excess of 20 percent thereafter is dismissed. Entitlement to a total disability rating due to unemployability (TDIU) for the period prior to July 10, 2015 is dismissed. FINDING OF FACT The Veteran submitted a November 2020 Appeals Satisfaction Notice withdrawing all remaining issues associated with his appeal. CONCLUSIONS OF LAW 1. The criteria for withdrawal of the appeal of the issue of entitlement to a rating in of 20 percent for lumbosacral strain for the period prior to August 25, 2020, and in excess of 40 percent thereafter have been met. 38 U.S.C. § 7105 (2012); 38 C.F.R. § 19.55 (2020). 2. The criteria for withdrawal of the appeal of the issue of entitlement to a compensable rating for right hip strain, limitation of extension have been met. 38 U.S.C. § 7105 (2012); 38 C.F.R. § 19.55 (2020). 3. The criteria for withdrawal of the appeal of the issue of entitlement to a rating in excess of 20 percent for residuals, fractured right 5th metatarsal have been met. 38 U.S.C. § 7105 (2012); 38 C.F.R. § 19.55 (2020). 4. The criteria for withdrawal of the appeal of the issue of entitlement to a compensable rating for right hip strain, limitation of abduction, adduction or rotation for the period prior to August 25, 2020, and in excess of 20 percent thereafter have been met. 38 U.S.C. § 7105 (2012); 38 C.F.R. § 19.55 (2020). 5. The criteria for withdrawal of the appeal of the issue of entitlement to a rating in excess of 10 percent for right hip strain, limitation of flexion for the period prior to August 25, 2020, and in excess of 20 percent thereafter have been met. 38 U.S.C. § 7105 (2012); 38 C.F.R. § 19.55 (2020). 6. The criteria for withdrawal of the appeal of the issue of entitlement to TDIU for the period prior to July 10, 2015 have been met. 38 U.S.C. § 7105 (2012); 38 C.F.R. § 19.55 (2020). REASONS AND BASES FOR FINDING AND CONCLUSIONS The Veteran served on active duty from June 1977 to August 1980. This matter came before the Board of Veterans Appeals (Board) on appeal from a February 2015 rating decision of the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Regional Office (RO). The Veteran testified before the undersigned Veteran's Law Judge during a December 2019 hearing. The transcript of the hearing is of record. A January 2020 Board decision remanded the issues on appeal for further development. An October 2020 rating decision granted service connection for right and left lower extremity sciatic radiculopathy. As this constituted a complete grant of the benefit sought on appeal for those issues, they are not before the Board. The October 2020 decision also increased the rating for lumbosacral strain from 20 to 40 percent effective August 25, 2020, increased the rating for right hip limitation of flexion from 10 to 20 percent effective August 25, 2020 and increased the rating for right hip limitation of abduction, adduction or rotation from 0 to 20 percent effective August 25, 2020. As higher ratings for these disabilities are assignable during the relevant period and the Veteran is presumed to seek the maximum available benefit, the issues remain on appeal. See AB v. Brown, 6 Vet. App. 35, 38 (1993). The decision also granted TDIU effective July 10, 2015. As TDIU was not granted for the entire period on appeal, the issue of entitlement to TDIU for the period prior to July 10, 2015 remains on appeal. See Harper v. Wilkie, 30 Vet. App. 356 (2018). 1. Entitlement to a rating in of 20 percent for lumbosacral strain for the period prior to August 25, 2020, and in excess of 40 percent thereafter 2. Entitlement to a compensable rating for right hip strain, limitation of extension 3. Entitlement to a compensable rating for right hip strain, limitation of abduction, adduction or rotation for the period prior to August 25, 2020, and in excess of 20 percent thereafter 4. Entitlement to a rating in excess of 10 percent for right hip strain, limitation of flexion for the period prior to August 25, 2020, and in excess of 20 percent thereafter 5. Entitlement to a rating in excess of 20 percent for residuals, fractured right 5th metatarsal 6. Entitlement to a total disability rating due to unemployability (TDIU) for the period prior to July 10, 2015 An appeal may be withdrawn by an appellant or his or her authorized representative as to any or all issues involved in the appeal at any time before the Board promulgates a decision. 38 C.F.R. § 19.55. In response to the April 2020 Supplemental Statement of the Case (SSOC), which adjudicated the issues of increased ratings for the lumbosacral strain, right hip strain limitation of extension, right hip strain limitation of abduction, right hip strain limitation of flexion, and residuals of a right foot fracture as well as entitlement to TDIU during the period prior to July 10, 2015, the Veteran submitted a November 2020 Appeals Satisfaction Notice stating that he was withdrawing all remaining issues associated with his appeal. The notice stated that the regional office should discontinue further development actions and that the Veteran no longer wished to pursue the remaining issues on appeal. As the Veteran submitted a written statement indicating in clear language that he wished to withdraw his appeal, the Board finds that the withdrawal was explicit, unambiguous, and done with the full understanding of the consequences of such an action. See DeLisio v. Shinseki, 25 Vet. App. 45 (2011). Accordingly, the Board does not have jurisdiction to review the issues on appeal, and the appeal is dismissed. 38 C.F.R. § 19.55. E. I. VELEZ Veterans Law Judge Board of Veterans' Appeals Attorney for the Board A. Arnold 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.