Citation Nr: 22014626 Decision Date: 03/14/22 Archive Date: 03/14/22 DOCKET NO. 19-09 034A DATE: March 14, 2022 ORDER Entitlement to service connection for sleep condition has been withdrawn and is dismissed. REMANDED Entitlement to an increased rating for service-connected anxiety neurosis is remanded. FINDING OF FACT On November 2, 2021, prior to the promulgation of a decision in the appeal, the Board received notification from the appellant that a withdrawal of his appeal for entitlement to service connection for sleep condition is requested. CONCLUSION OF LAW The criteria for withdrawal of an appeal by the appellant have been met. 38 U.S.C. § 7105; 38 C.F.R. § 19.55. REASONS AND BASES FOR FINDING AND CONCLUSION The Veteran served on active duty from September 1969 to April 1971. This matter comes before the Board of Veterans' Appeals (Board) on appeal from a February 2017 rating decision of the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Regional Office (RO). In November 2021, the Veteran testified at a Board hearing before the undersigned Veterans Law Judge. A transcript is included in the claims file. Withdrawal 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 An appeal may be withdrawn as to any or all issues involved in the appeal at any time before the Board promulgates a decision. 38 C.F.R. § 19.55. Withdrawal may be made by the appellant or by his or her authorized representative. Id. In the present case, the appellant has withdrawn his appeal for entitlement to service connection for a sleep condition, hence, there remain no allegations of errors of fact or law for appellate consideration. Indeed, the oral withdrawal was made during the November 2021 Board hearing with the Veteran; the Board finds it was explicit, unambiguous, and done with a full understanding of the consequences of such action on the part of the claimant. See DeLisio v. Shinseki, 25 Vet. App. 45, 57 (2011); see Acree v. O'Rourke, 891 F.3d 1009, 1014 (Fed. Cir. 2018). Accordingly, the Board does not have jurisdiction to review the appeal and it is dismissed. REASONS FOR REMAND The Veteran is unrepresented in this appeal. The Board acknowledges its obligation to read the filings of this pro se claimant liberally. See Moody v. Principi, 360 F.3d 1306 (Fed. Cir. 2004); Szemraj v. Principi, 357 F.3d 1370 (Fed. Cir. 2004); and Roberson v. Principi, 251 F.3d 1378 (Fed. Cir. 2001) (each emphasizing that pro se filings must be read liberally). Here, the Veteran filed an October 2016 Supplemental Claim for "sleep condition coming from [his service-connected] neurosis." The Veteran was afforded a November 2016 VA mental disorders examination. It was recorded that chronic sleep impairment, among other symptoms, actively apply to his diagnosed mental disorder. In a February 2017 Statement in Support of Claim, he stated his anxiety causes sleep disturbances. The February 2017 rating decision on appeal denied service connection for a sleep condition. In pertinent part, it stated, "Your sleep conditions is considered as a symptoms of your service connected anxiety neurosis. The evidence does not show that sleep condition is related to the service-connected condition of anxiety neurosis, nor is there any evidence of this disability during military service." The Veteran timely filed a June Notice of Disagreement (NOD) in June 2017. Specific issues of disagreement included: (1) sleep condition service condition secondary to neurosis service connection; (2) secondary sleep service connection to neurosis service connection medications use; (3) neurotic excoriation secondary related service connection sleep condition aggravated wake up trigger; (4) mild restless leg syndrome nervous intensification pains results service connection; (5) vellicate/vellication side effects resulting from many prescription exacerbations service connection. Subsequently, service connection for sleep condition was denied by the RO in a March 2019 Statement of the Case (SOC). During the November 2021 hearing, the Board determined the Veteran intended to file an increased rating claim, not a separate claim for service connection. Specifically, he seeks an increased rating for service-connected anxiety neurosis, claiming that the condition has worsened to the extent that he now has symptoms of chronic sleep impairment. See November 2021 Board Hearing transcript. Although a March 2019 SOC was issued addressing entitlement to service connection for a sleep condition, it did not address entitlement to an increased rating. The Board finds the Veteran raised a claim for an increased rating for anxiety neurosis in the June 2017 NOD. Where a NOD has been filed with regard to an issue, and a SOC has not been issued, the appropriate Board action is to remand the issue for issuance of a SOC. Manlincon v. West, 12 Vet. App. 238 (1999). The Veteran is advised that the Board cannot address such a claim in the first instance. As such, the claim is remanded for a SOC to adjudicate as an increased rating. The matter is REMANDED for the following action: Prepare and issues a SOC addressing the Veteran's claim of entitlement to an increased rating for service-connected anxiety neurosis. JONATHAN B. KRAMER Veterans Law Judge Board of Veterans' Appeals Attorney for the Board A.M. Edwards, 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.