Citation Nr: 22048294
Decision Date: 08/24/22	Archive Date: 08/24/22

DOCKET NO. 17-59 051A
DATE: August 24, 2022

ORDER

Entitlement a compensable rating for status post splenectomy with residual scarring is dismissed.

Entitlement service connection for non-Hodgkin's Lymphoma is dismissed.

FINDING OF FACT

On the record at the August 2022 Board hearing, before the promulgation of a decision on the appeal, the Veteran's representative withdrew his appeal for a compensable rating for status post splenectomy with residual scarring and service connection for non-Hodgkin's Lymphoma.

CONCLUSION OF LAW

The criteria for withdrawal of the Veteran's appeals for a compensable rating for status post splenectomy with residual scarring and service connection for non-Hodgkin's Lymphoma have been met.  38 U.S.C. § 7105; 38 C.F.R. § 19.55.

REASONS AND BASES FOR FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS

The Veteran served on active duty in the United States Navy from August 1992 to November 1999. 

These matters come before the Board of Veterans' Appeals (Board) on appeal from a September 2016 rating decision issued by the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Regional Office (RO).

The Veteran's representative appeared at a proceeding before the undersigned Veteran's Law Judge in August 2022. 

1. Entitlement a compensable rating for status post splenectomy with residual scarring is dismissed.

2. Entitlement service connection for non-Hodgkin's Lymphoma is dismissed.

The Board may dismiss any appeal that 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  An appeal may be withdrawn as to any or all issues involved in the appeal at any time before the Board promulgates a decision.  38 C.F.R. § 19.55.  Withdrawals may be made by the appellant or by his or her authorized representative.  38 C.F.R. § 19.55.  

Verbal withdrawal of a claim must be "explicit, unambiguous, and done with a full understanding of the consequences of such action."  Acree v. O'Rourke, 891 F.3d 1009, 1013-15 (Fed. Cir. 2018); DeLisio v. Shinseki, 25 Vet. App. 45, 57 (2011); see also Hansen v. Brown, 9 Vet. App. 29, 32 (1996) (holding the veteran validly withdrew his claim when "there [was] no indication that the veteran was misguided or lacked understanding of the consequences of his actions").

During the August 2022 Board hearing, the Veteran's authorized representative withdrew from appeal the issues of entitlement to a compensable rating for status post splenectomy with residual scarring and service connection for non-Hodgkin's Lymphoma.  The Board finds that the Veteran's withdrawal (by way of his representative) was explicit, unambiguous, and done with a full understanding of the consequences of such action because the Veteran's representative clearly stated the issues to be withdrawn and there is no evidence that the Veteran (or his representative) was misguided or lacked understanding of the consequences of his actions.  Accordingly, there remains no allegation of error of fact or law for appellate consideration with regard to the claims of entitlement to a compensable rating for status post splenectomy with residual scarring and service connection for non-Hodgkin's Lymphoma, and the issues must be dismissed.  DeLisio, 25 Vet. App. at 57.

 

 

STEVEN D. REISS

Veterans Law Judge

Board of Veterans' Appeals

Attorney for the Board	Straughn, Shavonne

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.