Citation Nr: 21028534 Decision Date: 05/11/21 Archive Date: 05/11/21 DOCKET NO. 10-00 499 DATE: May 11, 2021 ORDER The appeal of the issue of entitlement to an initial rating greater than 10 percent prior to March 27, 2012, and a rating greater than 40 percent from that date, for intervertebral disc syndrome (IVDS) of the low back with degenerative arthritis and sciatic nerve involvement (low back disability) is dismissed. The appeal of the issue of entitlement to a total disability rating for individual unemployability (TDIU) prior to February 8, 2017 due to the service-connected low back disability is dismissed. FINDING OF FACT In February 2021, the Veteran submitted an Appeals Satisfaction Notice, which was received prior to the promulgation of a decision by the Board of Veterans' Appeals (Board), stating that he was satisfied with the recent decision granting one or more of his issues on appeal and wished to withdraw all remaining issues associated with the appeal. CONCLUSIONS OF LAW 1. The criteria for withdrawal of the issue of entitlement to increased ratings in excess of 10 percent prior to March 27, 2012, and a rating greater than 40 percent thereafter for the service-connected low back disability, have been met. 38 U.S.C. § 7105; 38 C.F.R. §§ 20.202, 20.205. 2. The criteria for withdrawal of the issue of entitlement to a TDIU prior to February 8, 2017, have been met. 38 U.S.C. § 7105; 38 C.F.R. §§ 20.202, 20.205. REASONS AND BASES FOR FINDING AND CONCLUSIONS The Veteran served on active duty from October 1978 to October 1981. This matter comes to the Board on appeal from a January 2009 rating decision issued by the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Regional Office (RO). By way of history, the January 2009 rating decision granted, in pertinent part, service connection and assigned an initial 10 percent rating for IVDS with degenerative arthritis of the low back, with sciatic nerve involvement, effective July 9, 2008. In August 2009, the Veteran filed a notice of disagreement (NOD) with the assigned ratings. A statement of the case (SOC) was issued in October 2009, and the Veteran filed a substantive appeal (via a VA Form 9) in December 2009. In March 2013, the RO granted a 40 percent rating for the service-connected low back disability, effective March 27, 2012. In May 2015, the Veteran testified during a Board hearing before a Veterans Law Judge (VLJ) in Washington, D.C.; a transcript of that hearing is of record. In July 2015, the Board expanded the appeal to include a claim for a TDIU due to service-connected IVDS of the lumbar spine as a component of the claim for higher rating (consistent with Rice v. Shinseki, 22Vet. App.447 (2009)), and remanded the claims on appeal for further development. In June 2017, the Board, in relevant part, remanded the claims for entitlement to an increased rating for a back disability with sciatic involvement and a TDIU. This case was again before the Board in April 2019, when it was remanded to the agency of original jurisdiction (AOJ) for additional development. In February 2021, the Board notified the Veteran that the VLJ who conducted the May 2015 Board hearing had since retired. The Board offered the Veteran a new hearing before another VLJ, and provided him with 30 days within which to respond. In March 2021, the Veteran responded to the letter, and declined the opportunity for another hearing. 1. Entitlement to an initial rating greater than 10 percent prior to March 27, 2012, and a rating greater than 40 percent from that date, for the service-connected low back disability. 2. Entitlement to a TDIU. 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. Prior to promulgation of a Board decision, in February 2021, the Veteran submitted an Appeals Satisfaction Notice indicating that he was satisfied with the decision rendered and wished to withdraw all remaining issues associated with his appeal. Specifically, he indicated that he wished to "withdraw all remaining issue(s)" contained in the recent Statement of the Case (SOC)/SSOC and to discontinue further development actions associated with this appeal. The Appeals Satisfaction Notice also instructed the Veteran to only return the Notice form if he no longer wanted to pursue the remaining issues contained in the SOC/SSOC. See February 2021 Correspondence (Appeals Satisfaction Notice). In a January 2021 rating decision, the RO granted the Veteran's appeal seeking entitlement to a TDIU, effective February 8, 2017. On the same day, the AOJ issued an SSOC clearly listing the issues of entitlement to increased ratings in excess of 10 percent prior to March 27, 2012, and a rating greater than 40 percent thereafter for the service-connected low back disability and a TDIU prior to February 8, 2017. The Veteran's Appeals Satisfaction Notice was provided with the January 2021 SSOC. Therefore, the Board concludes that the Veteran's February 2021 Appeals Satisfaction Notice unambiguously indicated his intention to withdraw the appeal seeking entitlement to increased ratings in excess of 10 percent prior to March 27, 2012, and a rating greater than 40 percent thereafter for the service-connected low back disability and a TDIU prior to February 8, 2017. As the Veteran, in written correspondence, explicitly and unambiguously expressed his intent to withdraw these issues, his withdrawal was effective immediately, and there remains no allegations of errors of fact or law for appellate consideration. Accordingly, the appeal is dismissed. Richard Kettler Acting Veterans Law Judge Board of Veterans' Appeals Attorney for the Board J. R. Bobb, 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.