United States Department of Labor 

Employees’ Compensation Appeals Board 

__________________________________________ 

D.L., Appellant 

and 

U.S. POSTAL SERVICE, POST OFFICE, 

Islandia, NY, Employer 

__________________________________________ 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

Docket No. 14-0897 

Issued: September 25, 2015 

Appearances: Case Submitted on the Record

Thomas S. Harkins, Esq., for the appellant 

Office of Solicitor, for the Director 

ORDER REMANDING CASE 

Before: 

PATRICIA H. FITZGERALD, Deputy Chief Judge 

COLLEEN DUFFY KIKO, Judge 

ALEC J. KOROMILAS, Alternate Judge 

On March 11, 2014 appellant, through his attorney, filed a timely appeal from a 

January 2, 2014 merit decision of the Office of Workers’ Compensation Programs (OWCP) 

denying his occupational disease claim for a right should condition. The Board docketed the 

appeal as No. 14-0897. 

On January 28, 2013 appellant, then a 45-year-old letter carrier, filed a recurrence claim 

alleging that he sustained a recurrence of a previously accepted January 7, 2012 injury. OWCP 

determined that the recurrence claim should be adjudicated as a new occupational disease claim 

and assigned File No. xxxxxx857. The earlier claim for the January 7, 2012 injury, to which 

OWCP assigned File No. xxxxxx379, is not presently before the Board. 

The Board has duly considered the matter and finds that the case is not in posture for a 

decision. 

Appellant reported that since he returned to full duty on December 4, 2012 following the 

original injury he experienced increased soreness, stiffness, weakness, and decreased range of 

motion of his right shoulder and upper arm. He stated that all of his muscles and joints were 

aching, sore and tired from his job duties. Appellant explained that most of these discomforts 

subsided and diminished on the fourth week, except for his right shoulder and arm symptoms. 
2

He believed his current symptoms were related to the continuous and repetitive movements of 

the original right shoulder injury. Along with his claim, appellant submitted several medical 

reports dated January 18 to September 23, 2013 by Dr. Mark G. Grossman, a Board-certified 

orthopedic surgeon, who specializes in sports medicine, examined him for post status right 

should rotator cuff repair and revision and recommended modified duty. In a March 5, 2013 

attending physician’s report, Dr. Grossman noted an original injury of January 7, 2012 and stated 

that appellant sustained a recurrence of right shoulder pain on January 8, 2013. By decisions 

dated October 16, 2013 and January 2, 2014, OWCP denied appellant’s claim finding 

insufficient medical evidence to establish that his right shoulder condition was causally related to 

factors of his employment. 

OWCP procedures provide that cases should be combined when correct adjudication of 

the issues depends on frequent cross-reference between files. For example, if a new injury case 

is reported for an employee who previously filed an injury claim for a similar condition or the 

same part of the body, doubling is required.1

 In the instant case, appellant filed a recurrence of 

disability claim for a January 7, 2012 injury, which OWCP converted to an occupational disease 

claim and assigned File No. xxxxxx857. OWCP thereafter denied the claim, for failure to 

establish causal relationship, finding that appellant has not established that factors of his 

employment between January 7 and December 4, 2012 and caused his current diagnosed 

condition. 

The record reveals that appellant’s previous January 7, 2012 traumatic injury was 

assigned File No. xxxxxx379 and that the injury was to the same part of the body. The factual 

and medical evidence pertaining to appellant’s January 7, 2012 employment injury in File No. 

xxxxxx379, however, is not contained in the case record. Furthermore, the record indicates that 

appellant attempted to file this claim as a recurrence claim of the January 7, 2012 employment 

injury. On appeal appellant’s attorney alleges that the current claim could be adjudicated as a 

recurrence of disability within 90 days or less of the January 7, 2012 injury. OWCP’s 

procedures provide that, if a claim of recurrence of disability, rather than causal relationship.2

 

OWCP, however, continued to adjudicate the claim as a new occupational disease claim, and 

deny the claim on the grounds of causal relationship, even though the evidence supports that 

appellant may have sustained a recurrence of the January 7, 2012 right shoulder injury. It failed 

to properly combine or request combination of the present case record with the record of the 

January 7, 2012 employment injury, which appellant implicated as the initial cause of his current 

right shoulder condition.3

 The Board will consequently remand the case for OWCP to combine 

the current case record with File No. xxxxxx379 and determine whether he sustained either a 

                                                             1

 Federal (FECA) Procedure Manual, Part 2 -- Claims, File Maintenance & Management, Chapter 2.400.8(c) 

(February 2000). 

2 See Federal (FECA) Procedure Manual, Part 2 -- Claims, Fact of Injury, Chapter 2.1500(6)(a) (1995). 

3 See C.B., Docket No. 13-1091 (issued September 16, 2013) (remanding the case to OWCP to combine case files 

where the record revealed that appellant attributed a March 2, 2012 left foot injury to a previous April 12, 2004 

employment injury). See also M.Z., Docket No. 13-0414 (issued June 26, 2012) (remanding the case to OWCP to 

combine case files where it did not adequately explain why it adjudicated appellant’s notice of recurrence of 

disability as a new injury given that she alleged that she experienced pain immediately upon returning to work rather 

than relating her condition to new work factors). 
3

recurrence of disability of his January 7, 2012 employment injury. Following this and any 

further development deemed necessary, it shall issue a de novo decision on the merits. 

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED THAT the January 2, 2014 decision of the Office of 

Workers’ Compensation Programs is set aside and the case remanded for further action 

consistent with this order of the Board. 

Issued: September 25, 2015 

Washington, DC 

 

 Patricia H. Fitzgerald, Deputy Chief Judge 

 Employees’ Compensation Appeals Board 

 

 Colleen Duffy Kiko, Judge 

 Employees’ Compensation Appeals Board 

 

 Alec J. Koromilas, Alternate Judge 

 Employees’ Compensation Appeals Board