United States Department of Labor 

Employees’ Compensation Appeals Board 

__________________________________________ 

M.M., Appellant 

and 

DEPARTMENT OF VETERANS AFFAIRS, 

ATLANTA MEDICAL CENTER, Decatur, GA, 

Employer 

__________________________________________ 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

Docket No. 15-595 

Issued: June 2, 2015 

Appearances: Case Submitted on the Record

Appellant, pro se 

Office of Solicitor, for the Director 

DECISION AND ORDER 

Before: 

CHRISTOPHER J. GODFREY, Chief Judge 

COLLEEN DUFFY KIKO, Judge 

JAMES A. HAYNES, Alternate Judge 

JURISDICTION 

On January 23, 2015 appellant filed a timely appeal of a November 20, 2014 merit 

decision of the Office of Workers’ Compensation Programs (OWCP). Pursuant to the Federal 

Employees’ Compensation Act1

 (FECA) and 20 C.F.R. §§ 501.2(c) and 501.3, the Board has 

jurisdiction to consider the merits of the case. 

ISSUE 

The issue is whether appellant has met her burden of proof to establish a head injury in 

the performance of duty on July 15, 2014, as alleged. 

FACTUAL HISTORY 

On July 18, 2014 appellant, then a 40-year-old nurse, alleged that she hit her head on an 

open door of the Omnicell, which a logistics staff member was restocking on July 15, 2014. She 

 1

 5 U.S.C. § 8101 et seq.
2

sought treatment in the employing establishment emergency room and received a diagnosis of 

head trauma. Appellant underwent a computerized tomography (CT) scan of her head on 

July 15, 2014 due to a closed head injury. This CT scan did not demonstrate any acute 

intracranial abnormality. 

In a statement dated July 18, 2014, Angela Weiss, a coworker, stated that on July 14, 

2014 appellant walked into the open glass door of an Omnicell medical storage device. She 

stated that she heard the impact. Ms. Weiss stated that she could tell by the look on appellant’s 

face that she had been injured by the impact. Appellant stood still for a few minutes clutching 

her head while groaning. Ms. Weiss asked if she was okay, and appellant replied, “no.” After a 

few more moments, appellant seemed to lose her balance and sat down hard. She continued to 

clutch her head. Ms. Weiss asked if appellant felt that she had lost consciousness and she stated, 

“yes.” Appellant could recall her name and location, but was unable to state the day of the week 

or recall any information about the incident she just experienced. Ms. Weiss determined that 

appellant was unable to stand and walk and transferred her to the emergency department for 

evaluation and treatment. 

Vendola Lawrence, a coworker, submitted a statement dated July 17, 2014 and reported 

that appellant hit the right side of her head on the corner of the Omnicell door. Appellant stood 

exclaiming, “my head, my head,” for about three minutes and then sat on the floor. 

Dr. Badar Syed, a Board-certified neurologist, examined appellant on August 7, 2014. 

He stated on July 15, 2014 at work she suddenly developed sharp pain in the right side of her 

scalp. Appellant lowered herself to the floor, but when she stood up she hit her head against the 

counter top and briefly passed out. Since July 15, 2014 she experienced daily headaches, 

dizziness, nausea, and visual disturbances. Dr. Syed diagnosed probable postconcussion 

syndrome and stated that the possibility of traumatic vestibulopathy could not be excluded, 

possible tension type headache and visual disturbance which was very unusual for a typical head 

concussion. 

In a letter dated October 17, 2014, OWCP requested additional factual and medical 

evidence from appellant. 

By decision dated November 20, 2014, OWCP denied appellant’s traumatic injury claim 

finding that she failed to submit medical evidence including a firm diagnosis as a result of her 

accepted employment incident. 

LEGAL PRECEDENT 

An employee seeking benefits under FECA2

 has the burden of establishing the essential 

elements of his or her claim by the weight of the reliable, probative, and substantial evidence, 

including the fact that the individual is an “employee of the United States” within the meaning of 

FECA and that the claim was timely filed within the applicable time limitation period of FECA, 

that an injury was sustained in the performance of duty as alleged and that any disability or 

specific condition for which compensation is claimed is causally related to the employment 

 2 Id. at §§ 8101-8193. 
3

injury.3

 These are the essential elements of each and every compensation claim regardless of 

whether the claim is predicated upon a traumatic injury or an occupational disease.4

OWCP defines a traumatic injury as, “[A] condition of the body caused by a specific 

event or incident, or series of events or incidents, within a single workday or shift. Such 

condition must be caused by external force, including stress or strain which is identifiable as to 

time and place of occurrence and member or function of the body affected.”5

 To determine 

whether a federal employee has sustained a traumatic injury in the performance of duty, it must 

first be determined whether a “fact of injury” has been established. First the employee must 

submit sufficient evidence to establish that he or she actually experienced the employment 

incident at the time, place, and in the manner alleged.6 Second, the employee must submit 

sufficient evidence, generally only in the form a medical evidence, to establish that the 

employment incident caused a personal injury.7

 The Board has held that medical opinions that 

are speculative or equivocal in character diminish the probative value of the medical opinion.8

ANALYSIS 

Appellant filed a traumatic injury claim alleging that on July 15, 2014 she hit her head on 

the open door of a medical storage cabinet. She submitted witness statements regarding the 

event. Appellant sought treatment in the employing establishment emergency room and received 

a diagnosis of head trauma. However, there is no signature on this note and the Board is unable 

to determine if this diagnosis was provided by a physician; therefore, it is of no probative value.9

Appellant also submitted a report from Dr. Syed dated August 7, 2014 which noted a 

different history of injury and including a sharp pain prior to her traumatic incident. Dr. Syed 

diagnosed probable postconcussion syndrome, possible tension type headache, possible 

traumatic vestibulopathy, and visual disturbance. His diagnoses are speculative and equivocal. 

Dr. Syed did not offer a clear opinion as to which, if any, of the offered diagnoses appellant 

experienced and which, if any, resulted from her July 15, 2014 employment incident. Due to the 

lack of evidence of a clear diagnosed medical condition resulting from appellant’s accepted 

employment incident, the Board finds that appellant has not established her claim. 

The Board finds that appellant has failed to submit sufficient medical opinion evidence to 

establish that she sustained an injury in the performance of duty on July 15, 2014, as alleged. 

 3 Kathryn Haggerty, 45 ECAB 383, 388 (1994); Elaine Pendleton, 41 ECAB 1143 (1989). 

4 Victor J. Woodhams, 41 ECAB 345 (1989). 

5

 20 C.F.R. § 10.5(ee). 

6 John J. Carlone, 41 ECAB 354 (1989). 

7 J.Z., 58 ECAB 529 (2007). 

8 A.G., Docket No. 12-659 (issued August 22, 2012); D.D., 57 ECAB 734, 738 (2006). 

9 See Merton J. Sills, 39 ECAB 572 (1988). 
4

Appellant may submit new evidence or argument with a written request for 

reconsideration to OWCP within one year of this merit decision, pursuant to 5 U.S.C. § 8128(a) 

and 20 C.F.R. §§ 10.605 through 10.607. 

CONCLUSION 

The Board finds that appellant has not established a traumatic injury in the performance 

of duty on July 15, 2014, as alleged. 

ORDER 

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED THAT the November 20, 2014 decision of the Office of 

Workers’ Compensation Programs is affirmed. 

Issued: June 2, 2015 

Washington, DC 

 

 Christopher J. Godfrey, Chief Judge 

 Employees’ Compensation Appeals Board 

 

 Colleen Duffy Kiko, Judge 

 Employees’ Compensation Appeals Board 

 

 James A. Haynes, Alternate Judge 

 Employees’ Compensation Appeals Board