United States Department of Labor 

Employees’ Compensation Appeals Board 

__________________________________________ 

T.P., Appellant 

and 

U.S. POSTAL SERVICE, GEORGETOWN 

ANNEX, Washington, DC, Employer 

__________________________________________ 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

Docket No. 15-0806 

Issued: September 11, 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 

COLLEEN DUFFY KIKO, Judge 

JURISDICTION 

On February 26, 2015 appellant filed a timely appeal from an October 7, 2014 nonmerit 

decision of the Office of Workers’ Compensation Programs (OWCP).1

 As more than 180 days 

elapsed between the last merit decision of OWCP dated April 9, 2014, to the filing of this appeal, 

pursuant to the Federal Employees’ Compensation Act2

 (FECA) and 20 C.F.R. §§ 501.2(c) and 

501.3, the Board lacks jurisdiction to review the merits of this case.3

 1

 On February 26, 2015 appellant submitted a timely request for oral argument in connection with OWCP’s 

October 7, 2014 decision. After exercising its discretion, the Board, in an order issued on August 13, 2015, denied 

her request for oral argument, finding that the arguments on appeal could be adequately addressed in a decision 

based on a review of the case record. Order Denying Request for Oral Argument, Docket No. 15-0806 (issued 

August 13, 2015). 

2

 5 U.S.C. § 8101 et seq. 

3 See 20 C.F.R. § 501.3(e). 
2

ISSUE 

The issue is whether appellant abandoned her request for an oral hearing before an 

OWCP hearing representative. 

On appeal, appellant explains that she was unable to attend her hearing due to a job 

interview on the same day. She was nearing eviction and was $5,000.00 behind in her rent. 

FACTUAL HISTORY 

On January 10, 2014 appellant, then a 25-year-old city carrier assistant, filed a traumatic 

injury claim alleging that she sustained psychological stress as a result of being physically 

assaulted on that day. She stopped work on January 11, 2014. 

In an April 9, 2014 decision, OWCP denied appellant’s claim, finding the evidence 

insufficient to establish that the January 10, 2014 incident occurred as alleged. It found that she 

had not met her burden of proof to establish fact of injury as she failed to provide witness 

statements from those she named as having knowledge of the alleged incident, investigative 

documents from the employing establishment, or a police report documenting the claimed 

assault. 

On May 8, 2014 appellant requested an oral hearing before an OWCP hearing 

representative. 

By letter dated July 21, 2014, OWCP’s Branch of Hearings and Review notified 

appellant that her hearing would be held on September 12, 2014 at 1:00 p.m. in 

Washington, D.C. The notice was sent to appellant’s address of record. 

In an October 7, 2014 decision, an OWCP hearing representative found that appellant 

abandoned her hearing request. Appellant failed to appear and there was no evidence that she 

contacted OWCP either before or after the scheduled hearing to explain her failure to appear. 

LEGAL PRECEDENT 

A claimant who has received a final adverse decision by OWCP may obtain a hearing by 

writing to the address specified in the decision within 30 days of the date of the decision for 

which a hearing is sought.4

 Unless otherwise directed in writing by the claimant, the hearing 

representative will mail a notice of the time and place of the hearing to the claimant and any 

representative at least 30 days before the scheduled date.5

 It has the burden of proving that it 

mailed to appellant and her representative a notice of a scheduled hearing.6

 4 Id. at § 10.616(a). 

5 Id. at § 10.617(b). 

6 K.D., Docket No. 11-77 (issued August 18, 2011); Michelle R. Littlejohn, 42 ECAB 463 (1991). 
3

A claimant who fails to appear at a scheduled hearing may request in writing within 10 

days after the date set for the hearing that another hearing be scheduled. Where good cause for 

failure to appear is shown, another hearing will be scheduled and conducted by teleconference. 

The failure of the claimant to request another hearing within 10 days, or the failure of the 

claimant to appear at the second scheduled hearing without good cause shown, shall constitute 

abandonment of the request for a hearing.7

ANALYSIS 

Following OWCP’s April 9, 2014 decision denying appellant’s traumatic injury claim, 

appellant filed a timely request for an oral hearing before the hearing representative. On July 21, 

2014 OWCP’s Branch of Hearings and Review notified appellant that her hearing was scheduled 

for September 12, 2014 at 1:00 p.m. The notice was properly sent to her address of record.8 

Appellant failed to attend the scheduled hearing. She did not request a postponement and failed 

to provide any explanation for such failure to OWCP within 10 days of the scheduled date of the 

hearing. As all three conditions for abandonment are met, the Board finds that appellant 

abandoned her request for an oral hearing.9

On appeal, appellant explains that she was unable to attend her hearing due to a job 

interview on the same day. She was nearing eviction and was $5,000.00 behind in her rent. The 

Board notes, however, that the July 21, 2014 OWCP letter clearly set forth the time and date of 

the hearing and provided necessary information to postpone or reschedule the hearing. The 

Board notes that it is precluded from reviewing evidence not before OWCP at the time it issued 

its final decision.10 Because no timely explanation was given to OWCP’s Branch of Hearings 

and Review, either prior to or subsequent to the scheduled September 12, 2014 hearing, the 

Board finds that the conditions for abandonment as specified in OWCP regulations were met. 

OWCP, therefore, properly found that appellant abandoned her request for a hearing. 

CONCLUSION 

The Board finds that appellant abandoned her request for an oral hearing before the 

hearing representative. 

 7

 20 C.F.R. § 10.622(f); Federal (FECA) Procedure Manual, Part 2 -- Claims, Hearings and Review of the Written 

Record, Chapter 2.1601.6(g) (October 2011). 

8

 Absent evidence to the contrary, a letter properly addressed and mailed in the ordinary course of business is 

presumed to have been received. See James A. Gray, 54 ECAB 277 (2002). 

9 C.H., Docket No. 14-620 (issued June 25, 2014). 

10 See 20 C.F.R. § 501.2(c)(1). 
4

ORDER 

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED THAT the October 7, 2014 decision of the Office of 

Workers’ Compensation Programs is affirmed. 

Issued: September 11, 2015 

Washington, DC 

 

 Christopher J. Godfrey, Chief Judge 

 Employees’ Compensation Appeals Board 

 

 Patricia H. Fitzgerald, Deputy Chief Judge 

 Employees’ Compensation Appeals Board 

 

 Colleen Duffy Kiko, Judge 

 Employees’ Compensation Appeals Board