United States Department of Labor

Employees’ Compensation Appeals Board

__________________________________________

D.M., Appellant

and

U.S. POSTAL SERVICE, POST OFFICE,

St. Louis, MO, Employer

__________________________________________

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

Docket No. 19-0947

Issued: October 9, 2019

Appearances: Case Submitted on the Record

Alan J. Shapiro, Esq., for the appellant1

Office of Solicitor, for the Director

DECISION AND ORDER

Before:

PATRICIA H. FITZGERALD, Deputy Chief Judge

JANICE B. ASKIN, Judge

VALERIE D. EVANS-HARRELL, Alternate Judge

JURISDICTION

On April 1, 2019 appellant, through counsel, filed a timely appeal from a February 27, 

2019 merit decision of the Office of Workers’ Compensation Programs (OWCP). Pursuant to the 

Federal Employees’ Compensation Act2(FECA) and 20 C.F.R. §§ 501.2(c) and 501.3, the Board 

has jurisdiction to consider the merits of this case.

 

1

In all cases in which a representative has been authorized in a matter before the Board, no claim for a fee for legal 

or other service performed on appeal before the Board is valid unless approved by the Board. 20 C.F.R. § 501.9(e). 

No contract for a stipulated fee or on a contingent fee basis will be approved by the Board. Id. An attorney or 

representative’s collection of a fee without the Board’s approval may constitute a misdemeanor, subject to fine or 

imprisonment for up to one year or both. Id.; see also 18 U.S.C. § 292. Demands for payment of fees to a 

representative, prior to approval by the Board, may be reported to appropriate authorities for investigation.

2

5 U.S.C. § 8101 et seq. 
2

ISSUE

The issue is whether appellant has met his burden of proof to establish total disability for 

the period March 26 to July 6, 2018 causally related to his accepted June 8, 2017 employment 

injury. 

FACTUAL HISTORY

On June 26, 2017 appellant, then a 52-year-old computer program analyst, filed a traumatic 

injury claim (Form CA-1) alleging that on June 8, 2017 he tripped over the caster of his chair as 

he stood up from his desk, causing him to fall to the floor on his right hip while in the performance 

of duty. He noted that preexisting multiple sclerosis made him prone to falling. Appellant did not 

stop work at the time of injury. OWCP accepted that he sustained trochanteric bursitis of the right 

hip. 

Dr. Ha Minh Hoang, an attending orthopedic surgeon, administered a series of 

corticosteroid injections to the right hip in November 2017. In an attending physician’s report 

(Form OWCP-20) dated December 8, 2017, she diagnosed right trochanteric bursitis and a flareup of right hip osteoarthritis due to the June 8, 2017 employment injury. Dr. Hoang subsequently 

submitted follow-up reports diagnosing right hip pain.

Appellant stopped work on February 2, 2018. 

In a report dated March 6, 2018, Dr. Robert A. Morgan, a Board-certified orthopedic 

surgeon, diagnosed right hip arthritis, left-sided sciatica, cervical stenosis, and unspecified 

dysphagia. He held appellant off work.

On March 29, 2018 appellant claimed wage-loss compensation (Form CA-7) for the period 

March 26 to 30, 2018. He thereafter filed additional claims for ongoing wage-loss compensation.

In an April 12, 2018 report, Dr. Morgan opined that the accepted right trochanteric bursitis 

“led to posture and gait alterations causing [appellant’s] lumbar spine to become symptomatic. ” 

As appellant was no longer symptomatic, Dr. Morgan did not recommend lumbar surgery. He

prescribed physical therapy. 

In a development letter dated May 11, 2018, OWCP informed appellant that the evidence 

submitted was insufficient to establish his claim for wage-loss compensation commencing 

March 26, 2018. It advised him of deficiencies in the claim and the factual and medical evidence 

needed. OWCP afforded appellant 30 days to respond. 

In a June 21, 2018 report, Dr. Hoang held appellant off work due to right hip pain and 

tendinopathy of the right gluteus medius, related to the accepted employment injury. 

Appellant continued to file claims for wage-loss compensation (Form CA-7) through 

July 6, 2018. 

By decision dated July 11, 2018, OWCP denied appellant’s claim for wage-loss 

compensation for the period March 26 through July 6, 2018 as the medical evidence of record was 
3

insufficient to establish disability from work for the claimed period due to his accepted 

employment injury. 

On July 16, 2018 appellant, through counsel, requested a telephonic hearing before a 

representative of OWCP’s Branch of Hearings and Review. During the hearing held on 

December 13, 2018 appellant asserted that his cervical and lumbar conditions were asymptomatic 

prior to the June 8, 2017 employment injury. He submitted additional evidence.

In a July 13, 2018 report, Dr. Hoang noted that appellant had been unable to work due to 

lumbar issues unrelated to the June 8, 2017 employment injury. In an August 2, 2018 report, she 

returned him to full-duty work. 

By decision dated February 27, 2019, an OWCP hearing representative affirmed the 

July 11, 2018 decision, finding that the medical evidence of record was insufficient to establish 

disability from work for the claimed period due to the accepted June 8, 2017 employment injury. 

LEGAL PRECEDENT

An employee seeking benefits under FECA3 has the burden of proof to establish the

essential elements of his or her claim by the weight of the evidence.4 For each period of disability

claimed, the employee has the burden of proof to establish that he or she was disabled from work

as a result of the accepted employment injury.5 Whether a particular injury causes an employee to

become disabled from work, and the duration of that disability, are medical issues that must be

proven by a preponderance of probative and reliable medical opinion evidence.6

Under FECA the term “disability” means the incapacity, because of an employment injury,

to earn the wages that the employee was receiving at the time of injury. Disability is thus 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 a federal employment

injury, but who nevertheless has the capacity to earn the wages he or she was receiving at the time

of injury, has no disability as that term is used in FECA.7 

Causal relationship is a medical issue and the medical evidence required to establish a

causal relationship is rationalized medical evidence.8 Rationalized medical evidence is medical

evidence which includes a physician’s detailed medical opinion on the issue of causalrelationship.

The opinion of the physician must be based on a complete factual and medical background of the

 

3

Id. 

4

See D.W., Docket No. 18-0644 (issued November 15, 2018); Amelia S. Jefferson, 57ECAB 183 (2005).

5

Id.

6

See 20 C.F.R. § 10.5(f); N.M.,Docket No. 18-0939 (issued December 6, 2018).

7

Id.

8 R.H., Docket No. 18-1382 (issuedFebruary 14, 2019); JacquelineM.Nixon-Steward, 52ECAB 140 (2000).
4

claimant, must be one of reasonable medical certainty, and must be supported by medical

rationale.9

The Board will not require OWCP to pay compensation for disability in the absence of

medical evidence directly addressing the specific dates of disability for which compensation is

claimed. To do so, would essentially allow an employee to self-certify their disability and

entitlement to compensation.10

ANALYSIS

The Board finds that appellant has not met his burden of proof to establish total disability 

for the period March 26 through July 6, 2018 causally related to his accepted employment injury.

In support of his claim for total disability, appellant submitted a series of reports from

Dr. Morgan, who held appellant off work beginning March 6, 2018. Dr. Morgan opined in his 

April 12, 2018 report that the accepted right trochanteric bursitis led to gait alteration that 

aggravated appellant’s lumbar condition. However, he did not specifically address how the 

accepted condition caused or contributed to the claimed period of disability. The Board has held 

that medical evidence that does not offer an opinion regarding the cause of an employee’s 

condition or disability is of no probative value on the issue of causal relationship.

11

 Without a 

specific opinion as to how the June 8, 2017 employment injury had caused the claimed period of 

disability, the opinions expressed by Dr. Morgan are insufficient to establish the claim for total 

disability.12

Similarly, Dr. Hoang held appellant off work as of June 21, 2018 due to right hip pain and 

tendinopathy of the right gluteus medius which she attributed to the accepted employment injury. 

She also opined in a July 13, 2018 report that he had been disabled from work due to 

nonoccupational lumbar conditions. As Dr. Hoang did not relate appellant’s disability to the 

accepted right trochanteric bursitis, her reports are insufficient to meet his burden of proof.

13

The issue of disability from work can only be resolved by competent medical evidence. 14 

Drs. Morgan and Hoang failed to provide a rationalized medical opinion explaining how

appellant’s inability to work from March 26 to July 6, 2018 resulted from the accepted 

employment injury. As such, the Board finds that appellant has not met his burden of proof.15

 

9 C.B.,Docket No. 18-0633 (issuedNovember 16, 2018); Leslie C.Moore, 52ECAB 132 (2000); Gary L. Fowler,

45 ECAB 365 (1994).

10 A.T., Docket No. 19-0410 (issued August 2019);see B.K.,Docket No. 18-0386 (issued September 14, 2018).

11 See L.B., Docket No. 18-0533 (issued August 27, 2018); D.K., Docket No. 17-1549 (issued July 6, 2018).

12 Id.

13 J.D., Docket No. 18-1533 (issued February 27, 2019).

14 A.T., supra note 10; R.C., 59 ECAB 546 (2008).

15 A.T., id. 
5

On appeal counsel contends that OWCP did not accord due deference to appellant’s 

attending physicians and applied an improper standard of causation. For the reasons set forth 

herein, appellant has not met his burden of proof to establish total disability for the claimed period

as causally related to the accepted June 8, 2017 employment injury. 

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 met his burden of proof to establish total disability 

for the period March 26 to July 6, 2018, causally related to his accepted June 8, 2017 employment 

injury.

ORDER

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED THAT the February 27, 2019 decision of the Office of 

Workers’ Compensation Programs is affirmed.

Issued: October 9, 2019

Washington, DC

Patricia H. Fitzgerald, Deputy Chief Judge

Employees’ Compensation Appeals Board

Janice B. Askin, Judge

Employees’ Compensation Appeals Board

Valerie D. Evans-Harrell, Alternate Judge

Employees’ Compensation Appeals Board