Citation Nr: A24029746
Decision Date: 06/06/24	Archive Date: 06/06/24

DOCKET NO. 201023-116851
DATE: June 6, 2024

ORDER

The appeal of the issue of entitlement to service connection for urinary stricture with overactive bladder is dismissed.

FINDING OF FACT

A May 2024 statement by the Veteran stated his intent to withdraw all pending claims.

CONCLUSION OF LAW

The criteria for withdrawal of an appeal by the Veteran have been met.  38 U.S.C. § 7105; 38 C.F.R. § 20.205.

REASONS AND BASES FOR FINDING AND CONCLUSION

The Veteran served on active duty in the Marine Corps from June 1991 to June 1995.

This matter comes before the Board of Veterans' Appeals (Board) on appeal from an October 2020 rating decision issued by the Agency of Original Jurisdiction (AOJ), Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Regional Office (RO), which denied the Veteran's claim for urinary stricture with overactive bladder.  In October 2020 the Veteran submitted a VA Form 10182, Decision Review Request: Board Appeal (Notice of Disagreement), in which he timely appealed the October 2020 rating decision to the Board and selected the Board Hearing Lane under the Appeals Modernization Act (AMA) review system.

In response to an April 2024 BVA Hearing Scheduled Letter, the Veteran sent correspondence in May 2024, stating that the Veteran wished to withdraw his hearing request and withdraw all claims.  See April 2024 BVA Hearing Scheduled Letter, May 2024 VA 21-4138 Statement In Support of Claim.  Under the AMA, in the event of a Board hearing option withdrawal, the Board will consider the evidence of record at the time of the decision on appeal, in this case the October 2020 rating decision, as well as evidence submitted within 90 days after the Board hearing withdrawal.  38 C.F.R. § 20.302(b), 38 U.S.C. § 7113(b).  

If evidence was submitted either (1) during the period after the AOJ issued the decision on appeal and prior to the Board hearing withdrawal, or (2) more than 90 days following the Board hearing withdrawal, the Board did not consider it in its decision.  38 C.F.R. §§ 20.300, 20.302(a), 20.801.  If the Veteran would like VA to consider any evidence that was submitted that the Board could not consider, the appellant may file a Supplemental Claim (VA Form 20-0995) and submit or identify this evidence.  38 C.F.R. § 3.2501.  If the evidence is new and relevant, VA will issue another decision on the claim[s], considering the new evidence in addition to the evidence previously considered.  Id.  Specific instructions for filing a Supplemental Claim are included with this decision. 

The Board has jurisdiction where there is a question of law or fact on appeal to the Secretary.  38 U.S.C. § 7104.  Under 38 U.S.C. § 7105, the Board may dismiss any appeal which fails to allege specific error of fact or law in the determination being appealed.  A substantive appeal may be withdrawn by the Veteran or by an authorized representative at any time before the Board promulgates a decision and must do so in writing or on the record at a hearing.  38 C.F.R. § 20.205.  By a written statement in May 2024, the Veteran requested to withdraw all pending claims before the Board.  The Veteran has properly withdrawn his appeal.  Therefore, there remain no allegations of errors of fact or law for appellate consideration.  Withdrawals are effective as of the date they are received.  When a claim is withdrawn, it ceases to exist.  Hanson v. Brown, 9 Vet. App. 29, 32 (1996).  The Board does not have jurisdiction to review this issue, and the appeal is dismissed.

 

 

Frederic P. Gallun

Veterans Law Judge

Board of Veterans' Appeals

Attorney for the Board	Axelrad, E

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.