United States Department of Labor 

Employees’ Compensation Appeals Board 

__________________________________________ 

J.S., Appellant 

and 

U.S. POSTAL SERVICE, POST OFFICE, 

San Francisco, CA, Employer 

__________________________________________ 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

Docket No. 16-0912 

Issued: September 6, 2016 

Appearances: Case Submitted on the Record

Appellant, pro se 

Office of Solicitor, for the Director 

ORDER REMANDING CASE 

Before: 

CHRISTOPHER J. GODFREY, Chief Judge 

PATRICIA H. FITZGERALD, Deputy Chief Judge 

COLLEEN DUFFY KIKO, Judge 

On April 1, 2016 appellant filed a timely appeal of a November 30, 2015 merit decision 

of the Office of Workers’ Compensation (OWCP) that denied his claim for left wrist surgery and 

concurrent wage-loss compensation. OWCP adjudicated the case under File No. xxxxxx466. 

The Board docketed the appeal as 16-0912. 

On January 24, 2014 appellant filed a traumatic injury claim (Form CA-1) alleging that 

on January 10, 2014 he sprained his left wrist while pushing a heavy mail cart onto a trailer. 

OWCP denied this claim on March 14, 2014. Appellant requested a hearing, and in a decision 

dated November 7, 2014, an OWCP hearing representative reversed the March 14, 2014 

decision. OWCP accepted left wrist sprain (under File No. xxxxxx466). 

In a telephone conversation on February 4, 2015, appellant related that he reinjured his 

left wrist on January 31, 2015. OWCP advised him to file a new claim. Appellant filed a new 

claim, adjudicated by OWCP under File No. xxxxxx212. 

Under the instant claim (File No. xxxxxx466), in March 2015 appellant began submitting 

claims for compensation (Form CA-7) beginning on March 11, 2015. The record also contains a 

request for fusion of the left wrist, dated March 11, 2015. 
2

By decision dated May 29, 2015, OWCP denied the compensation claims and 

authorization for surgery. It noted that appellant had a new claim, File No. xxxxxx212, that had 

not been formally adjudicated and, although he asked that it be withdrawn, OWCP continued to 

develop this new injury.1

 Appellant requested a hearing that was held on October 1, 2015. He 

testified that on January 31, 2015 he was lifting a plate weighing 100 pounds and felt immediate 

severe pain. Appellant indicated that, on the advice of the clinic where he was treated and an 

employing establishment supervisor, he submitted all information regarding the 2015 left wrist 

injury under File No. xxxxxx466. In a November 30, 2015 decision, an OWCP hearing 

representative denied appellant’s claims for wage-loss compensation and surgical authorization 

under File No. xxxxxx466 because the medical evidence was insufficient to establish the need 

for surgery due to the January 10, 2014 injury. The hearing representative explained that, if the 

January 31, 2015 injury played a role in materially worsening appellant’s left wrist condition 

precipitating the need for surgery, he should request authorization under File No. xxxxxx212. 

The hearing representative also indicated that OWCP should consider doubling the files. 

The Board has duly considered the matter and concludes that this case is not in posture 

for decision. OWCP procedures provide that cases should be combined when correct 

adjudication of the issues depends on frequent cross-reference between files.2

 In the instant case, 

OWCP denied claims for wage-loss compensation and surgical authorization for a January 10, 

2014 left wrist injury (File No. xxxxxx466). As noted, appellant has a second claim for a 

January 31, 2015 left wrist injury (File No. xxxxxx212). OWCP denied the claims for disability 

and surgical authorization under File No. xxxxxx466, and noted that OWCP should consider 

doubling the files. 

Upon review of the case record, the Board notes that an addendum to a left wrist x-ray, 

dated January 22, 2014, shortly after the January 10, 2014 left wrist injury, advised that a 

scaphoid lunate ligamentous insufficiency or tear was present. On July 23, 2015 Dr. Michael F. 

Sacco, a Board-certified orthopedic surgeon, noted a history that appellant hyperextended his left 

wrist on January 10, 2014. He advised that his review of the January 22, 2014 x-ray plus an 

x-ray he took for comparison were consistent with a scapholunate ligament tear, which was 

consistent with appellant’s injury. Dr. Sacco recommended surgery. On October 29, 2015 

Dr. Jaspal Sidhu, appellant’s attending physician who is Board-certified in emergency medicine, 

noted his review of appellant’s medical history and the transcript of the October 2015 hearing. 

He described both appellant’s left wrist injuries. Dr. Sidhu advised that instability, caused by the 

January 1, 2014 injury, was made much worse by the January 31, 2015 reinjury. He concluded 

that appellant’s current left wrist condition was caused by these employment injuries and 

recommended surgical repair. 

As these files have not been combined, the Board is unable to determine whether all 

pertinent evidence had been reviewed in order to establish the need for surgery and concurrent 

disability compensation, either due to the January 10, 2014 left wrist injury, the January 31, 2015 

left wrist injury, or both. The record before the Board does not contain the evidence from the 

 1

 File No. xxxxxx212 remains open and is under development. 

2

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

(February 2000). 
3

2015 claim. The Board, therefore, is unable to properly adjudicate the issues of appellant’s 

claims for compensation and surgical authorization. The Board finds the case is not in posture 

for decision as the record before the Board is incomplete and would not permit an informed 

adjudication of the case by the Board. The case must be remanded to OWCP to combine the 

files and for further reconstruction and development deemed necessary, to be followed by an 

appropriate de novo decision.3

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED THAT the November 30, 2015 decision of the Office of 

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

consistent with this order of the Board. 

Issued: September 6, 2016 

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 

 3 See W.B., Docket No. 15-1751 (issued March 8, 2016).