United States Department of Labor 

Employees’ Compensation Appeals Board 

__________________________________________ 

P.S., Appellant 

and 

U.S. POSTAL SERVICE, POST OFFICE, 

Indianapolis, IN, Employer 

__________________________________________ 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

Docket No. 15-0942 

Issued: October 9, 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 

PATRICIA H. FITZGERALD, Deputy Chief Judge 

JAMES A. HAYNES, Alternate Judge 

JURISDICTION 

On March 25, 2015 appellant filed a timely appeal from February 6 and March 24, 2015 

merit decisions 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 over the merits of this case.2

ISSUE 

The issue is whether appellant met her burden of proof to establish disability for the 

periods March 10 through April 16, 2014, June 14 through July 25, 2014, and January 14 

through March 17, 2015 causally related to her federal employment. 

                                                             1

 5 U.S.C. § 8101 et seq. 

2

 The Board notes that, following the issuance of the March 24, 2015 OWCP decision, appellant submitted new 

evidence. The Board is precluded from reviewing evidence which was not before OWCP at the time it issued its 

final decision. See 20 C.F.R. § 501.2(c)(1). 
2

FACTUAL HISTORY 

By notice provided May 20, 2014, OWCP accepted that appellant, a 28-year-old city 

carrier assistant, sustained a traumatic sprain of the left shoulder and upper arm and a contusion 

of the left shoulder region. Appellant was informed that if she lost time from work due to her 

work-related condition she could claim compensation using a Form CA-7. 

Appellant filed claims for compensation (Form CA-7) for the periods March 10 through 

April 16, 2014, June 14 through July 25, 2014, and January 14 through March 17, 2015.3

In letters dated June 9, 2014 and February 2, 2015, OWCP requested additional medical 

evidence to establish appellant’s disability from work during the periods claimed and afforded 

her 30 days to respond. 

Appellant submitted reports dated March 31 and April 15, 2014 from Dr. Kara Davis, an 

internist, who diagnosed backache, shoulder pain, and depressive disorder. 

By decision dated September 12, 2014, OWCP denied appellant’s claim for disability for 

the periods March 10 through April 16, 2014 and June 14 through July 25, 2014 on the basis that 

the medical evidence submitted was insufficient to support disability causally connected to the 

employment injuries. 

On October 29, 2014 appellant requested reconsideration. She submitted a November 4, 

2014 narrative statement and physical therapy notes in support of her claim. Appellant also 

submitted a January 19, 2015 duty status report from Dr. Prasant Atluri, a Board-certified 

orthopedic hand surgeon, who indicated that appellant fell down stairs with a mailbag and 

diagnosed pain in her left shoulder joint. Dr. Atluri opined that appellant was disabled for work 

and advised that she had no use of her left upper extremity. 

In reports dated June 16, 2014 through January 5, 2015, Dr. Osama Ramsey, an 

occupational medicine specialist, diagnosed contusion of the left shoulder, left shoulder sprain, 

and shoulder region joint pain. He opined that appellant had no work capacity and instructed her 

to remain off work. 

By decision dated February 6, 2015, OWCP denied modification of its prior decision. 

In a January 19, 2015 report, Dr. Atluri reiterated his diagnosis and indicated that since 

cessation of medication, appellant’s pain had returned. He noted that her significant pain was 

too severe to make progress in therapy and restricted her to no use of the affected hand/arm. 

                                                             3

 Appellant also filed a claim for compensation (Form CA-7) for the period October 29, 2014 through 

January 13, 2015. By decision dated April 8, 2015, OWCP denied appellant’s claim for disability for the period 

claimed on the basis that the medical evidence submitted was insufficient to support disability due to the accepted 

employment injuries. As appellant has not appealed from this decision it is not before the Board on this appeal. See 

20 C.F.R. § 501.3(a). 
3

By decision dated March 24, 2015, OWCP denied appellant’s claim for disability for the 

period January 14 through March 17, 2015 because the medical evidence submitted was 

insufficient to support disability due to the employment injuries. 

LEGAL PRECEDENT 

Section 8102(a) of FECA4 sets forth the basis upon which an employee is eligible for 

compensation benefits. That section provides: “The United States shall pay compensation as 

specified by this subchapter for the disability or death of an employee resulting from personal 

injury sustained while in the performance of his duty....” In general the term “disability” under 

FECA means “incapacity, because of an employment injury, to earn the wages the employee was 

receiving at the time of injury.”5 This meaning, for brevity, is expressed as disability for work.6 

For each period of disability claimed, the employee has the burden of proving that she was 

disabled for work as a result of the accepted employment injury.7

 Whether a particular injury 

caused an employee to be disabled for employment and the duration of that disability are medical 

issues which must be proven by the preponderance of the reliable probative and substantial 

medical evidence.8

Disability is not synonymous with physical impairment, which may or may not result in 

an incapacity to earn wages. An employee who has a physical impairment causally related to her 

federal employment, but who nonetheless has the capacity to earn the wages she was receiving at 

the time of injury, has no disability as that term is used under FECA and is not entitled to 

compensation for loss of wage-earning capacity. The Board will not require OWCP to pay 

compensation for disability in the absence of any medical evidence directly addressing the 

particular period of disability for which compensation is claimed. To do so would essentially 

allow employees to self-certify their disability and entitlement to compensation.9

ANALYSIS 

The Board finds that appellant has not established that she was disabled due to her 

employment injuries for the periods March 10 through April 16, 2014, June 14 through July 25, 

2014, and January 14 through March 17, 2015. 

While OWCP accepted that appellant sustained a sprain of the left shoulder and upper 

arm, and a contusion of the left shoulder region, appellant bears the burden of proof to establish 

through medical evidence both that she was disabled for the claimed periods and that her 

                                                             4

 5 U.S.C. § 8102(a). 

5

 20 C.F.R. § 10.5(f). See also William H. Kong, 53 ECAB 394 (2002); Donald Johnson, 44 ECAB 540, 

548 (1993); John W. Normand, 39 ECAB 1378 (1988); Gene Collins, 35 ECAB 544 (1984). 

6 See Roberta L. Kaaumoana, 54 ECAB 150 (2002). 

7 See William A. Archer, 55 ECAB 674 (2004). 

8 See Fereidoon Kharabi, 52 ECAB 291, 292 (2001). 

9 Id. 
4

disability was causally related to her accepted injuries.10 The Board finds that appellant 

submitted no rationalized medical evidence explaining how the employment injuries materially 

worsened or aggravated her medical conditions and caused her to be disabled for work for the 

periods March 10 through April 16, 2014, June 14 through July 25, 2014, and January 14 

through March 17, 2015. 

In his reports, Dr. Ramsey diagnosed contusion of left shoulder, left shoulder sprain, and 

shoulder region joint pain. He opined that appellant had no work capacity and instructed her to 

remain off work. The Board finds that Dr. Ramsey failed to provide a probative medical opinion 

on whether and how appellant was disabled on the dates at issue due to her accepted conditions. 

Therefore, Dr. Ramsey’s reports are insufficient to establish that she was disabled for work due 

to the employment injuries for the period claimed. 

In his reports, Dr. Atluri diagnosed pain in the left shoulder joint and also opined that 

appellant was disabled for work. He advised that she had no use of the left extremity. Dr. Atluri 

noted that her pain was too severe to make progress in therapy and restricted her to no use of the 

affected hand/arm. The Board finds that Dr. Atluri failed to provide a medical opinion 

explaining how appellant’s accepted conditions caused her to be disabled for employment on the 

dates at issue. The Board finds that the reports from Dr. Atluri are insufficient to establish 

appellant’s claim for compensation. 

Appellant submitted reports from Dr. Davis who diagnosed backache, shoulder pain, and 

depressive disorder. Dr. Davis also failed to offer a probative medical opinion that appellant was 

disabled for the periods at issue due to her accepted conditions. Thus, the Board finds her 

reports are insufficient to establish appellant’s claim for compensation.11

The physical therapy notes submitted do not constitute competent medical evidence as 

they do not contain rationale by a physician relating appellant’s disability to her employment.12

Appellant has not submitted any rationalized medical evidence establishing that she was 

disabled for the periods March 10 through April 16, 2014, June 14 through July 25, 2014, and 

January 14 through March 17, 2015 causally related to the accepted employment injuries. Thus, 

appellant has not met her burden of proof to establish that she is entitled to compensation for any 

disability for these time periods. 

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. 

                                                             10 See supra notes 7 and 8. See also V.P., Docket No. 09-337 (issued August 4, 2009). 

11 Id.

12 See 5 U.S.C. § 8101(2). Section 8101(2) of FECA provides as follows: “(2) ‘physician’ includes surgeons, 

podiatrists, dentists, clinical psychologists, optometrists, chiropractors, and osteopathic practitioners within the 

scope of their practice as defined by State law.” See also Paul Foster, 56 ECAB 208, 212 n.12 (2004); Joseph N. 

Fassi, 42 ECAB 677 (1991); Barbara J. Williams, 40 ECAB 649 (1989). 
5

CONCLUSION 

The Board finds that appellant has not met her burden of proof to establish disability for 

the periods March 10 through April 16, 2014, June 14 through July 25, 2014, and January 14 

through March 17, 2015 causally related to her federal employment. 

ORDER 

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED THAT the March 24 and February 6, 2015 decisions of the 

Office of Workers’ Compensation Programs are affirmed. 

Issued: October 9, 2015 

Washington, DC 

 

 Christopher J. Godfrey, Chief Judge 

 Employees’ Compensation Appeals Board 

 

 Patricia H. Fitzgerald, Deputy Chief Judge 

 Employees’ Compensation Appeals Board 

 

 James A. Haynes, Alternate Judge 

 Employees’ Compensation Appeals Board