United States Department of Labor

Employees’ Compensation Appeals Board

__________________________________________

R.T., Appellant

and

U.S. POSTAL SERVICE, POST OFFICE, 

Detroit, MI, Employer

__________________________________________

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

Docket No. 21-0544

Issued: December 17, 2021

Appearances: Case Submitted on the Record

Appellant, pro se

Office of Solicitor, for the Director

DECISION AND ORDER

Before:

JANICE B. ASKIN, Judge

PATRICIA H. FITZGERALD, Alternate Judge

VALERIE D. EVANS-HARRELL, Alternate Judge

JURISDICTION

On February 22, 2021 appellant filed a timely appeal from a November 27, 2020 merit 

decision 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 has met her burden of proof to establish a left shoulder 

condition causally related to the accepted May 17, 2020 employment incident.

1

5 U.S.C. § 8101 et seq.

2 The Board notes that,following the November 27, 2020 decision, OWCP received additional evidence. However, 

the Board’s Rules of Procedure provides: “The Board’s review of a case is limited to the evidence in the case record 

that was before OWCP at the time of its final decision. Evidence not before OWCP will not be considered by the 

Board for the first time on appeal.” 20 C.F.R. § 501.2(c)(1). Thus, the Board is precluded from reviewing this 

additional evidence for the first time on appeal.
2

FACTUAL HISTORY

On September 17, 2020 appellant, then a 52-year-old parcel post distributor, filed a 

traumatic injury claim (Form CA-1) alleging that on May 17, 2020 she sustained a left shoulder 

full rotator cuff tear while in the performance of duty. She explained that her injury was caused 

by lifting, pushing, and pulling packages with her left arm. Appellant noted that she was unable 

to use both arms because of a separate injury she sustained to her right arm. 3 On the reverse side 

of the claim form the employing establishment asserted that she was not in the performance of 

duty when her injury occurred, contending that she did not file her claim until four months after 

her injury occurred. Appellant stopped work on September 16, 2020.

In a September 16, 2020 medical report, Dr. Nicholas Schoch, a Board-certified orthopedic 

surgeon, recounted a previous evaluation of appellant’s left shoulder he performed on August 19, 

2020 where he diagnosed chronic impingement symptoms with parascapular myofasciitis. He 

administered cortisone injections to both shoulders that were found to be effective for about a week 

before her pain worsened. Dr. Schoch diagnosed bursitis of the left and right shoulders, right and 

left myofasciitis, a partial tear of the right rotator cuff, a degenerative tear of the left rotator cuff,

and pain in the right and left shoulders. He scheduled for appellant to undergo surgery to treat her 

conditions. In a medical note of even date, Dr. Schoch indicated that she would need to be off 

from work for an undetermined amount of time and noted that she would be undergoing surgery 

on November 10, 2020. He also attached an information sheet explaining the causes of bursitis 

and methods to treat the condition.

In a September 16, 2020 diagnostic report, Dr. Jan Mourelatos, a Board-certified 

diagnostic radiologist, reviewed a magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) scan of appellant’s left 

shoulder, which revealed partial tears of the interspace tendons.

In a September 28, 2020 duty status report (Form CA-17), Dr. Schoch diagnosed left 

shoulder impingement and indicated that an MRI study revealed a rotator cuff tear. He identified 

August 17, 2020 as the date of injury and opined that appellant was totally disabled from work.

In an October 20, 2020 development letter, OWCP advised appellant of the deficiencies of 

her claim, and requested additional factual and medical evidence. It afforded her 30 days to 

respond.

In a November 2, 2020 medical note, Dr. Schoch diagnosed left shoulder bursitis, general 

myofasciitis, and rotator cuff tear. He released appellant to return to work on November 11, 2020 

with restrictions.

Appellant also submitted an information sheet, indicating that she would undergo surgery 

on January 12, 2021.

3 Appellant previously filed a traumatic injury claim on March12, 2020 for a right shoulder injury under OWCP 

File No. xxxxxx318. OWCP has not issued a decision on thatclaim.
3

By decision dated November 27, 2020, OWCP denied appellant’s traumatic injury claim, 

finding that the medical evidence of record was insufficient to establish causal relationship 

between her diagnosed condition and the accepted May 17, 2020 employment incident.

LEGAL PRECEDENT

An employee seeking benefits under FECA4 has the burden of proof to establish the 

essential elements of his or her claim, including that the individual is an employee of the United 

States within the meaning of FECA, that the claim was timely filed within the applicable time 

limitation of FECA,5that an injury was sustained in the performance of duty as alleged, and that 

any disability or medical condition for which compensation is claimed is causally related to the 

employment injury.6 These are the essential elements of each and every compensation claim, 

regardless of whether the claim is predicated upon a traumatic injury or an occupational disease.7

To determine whether a federal employee has sustained a traumatic injury in the 

performance of duty, it first must be determined whether fact of injury has been established. First, 

the employee must submit sufficient evidence to establish that he or she actually experienced the

employment incident at the time and place, and in the manner alleged. Second, the employee must 

submit sufficient evidence to establish that the employment incident caused a personal injury.8

The medical evidence required to establish causal relationship is rationalized medical 

opinion evidence.9 The opinion of the physician must be based on a complete factual and medical 

background of the employee, must be one of reasonable medical certainty, and must be supported 

by medical rationale explaining the nature of the relationship between the diagnosed condition and 

specific employment incident identified by the employee.10

4

Supra note 1.

5 V.L., Docket No. 20-0884 (issued February 12, 2021); F.H., Docket No. 18-0869 (issued January 29, 2020); J.P., 

Docket No. 19-0129 (issued April26, 2019); Joe D. Cameron, 41 ECAB 153 (1989).

6 C.H., Docket No. 20-1212 (issued February 12, 2021); L.C., Docket No. 19-1301 (issued January 29, 2020); R.C., 

59 ECAB 427 (2008); James E. Chadden, Sr., 40 ECAB 312 (1988).

7 V.L., supra note 5; P.A., Docket No. 18-0559 (issued January 29, 2020); K.M., Docket No. 15-1660 (issued 

September 16, 2016); DeloresC. Ellyett, 41 ECAB 992 (1990).

8 T.J., Docket No. 19-0461 (issued August 11, 2020); K.L., Docket No. 18-1029 (issued January 9, 2019); John J. 

Carlone, 41 ECAB 354 (1989).

9 C.H., supra note 6; S.S., Docket No. 19-0688 (issued January 24, 2020); A.M., Docket No. 18-1748 (issued 

April 24, 2019); RobertG. Morris, 48 ECAB 238 (1996).

10 V.L., supra note 5; T.L., Docket No. 18-0778 (issued January 22, 2020); Y.S., Docket No. 18-0366 (issued 

January 22, 2020); Victor J. Woodhams, 41 ECAB 345, 352 (1989).
4

ANALYSIS

The Board finds that appellant has not met her burden of proof to establish a left shoulder 

condition causally related to the accepted May 17, 2020 employment incident.

In a September 16, 2020 medical report, Dr. Schoch diagnosed bursitis myofasciitis, and 

pain of the bilateral shoulders, a partial tear of the right rotator cuff, and a degenerative tear of the 

left rotator cuff. He also scheduled appellant to undergo surgery to treat her condition. The Board 

has held that medical evidence that does not offer an opinion regarding the cause of an employment 

condition is of no probative value on the issue of causal relationship. 11 For this reason,

Dr. Schoch’s September 16, 2020 medical report is insufficient to meet appellant’s burden of 

proof.

Similarly, in his medical notes dated September 16 and November 2, 2020, Dr. Schoch 

diagnosed left shoulder bursitis, general myofasciitis, and rotator cuff tear. He also identified work 

restrictions due to appellant’s condition. As noted above, medical evidence that does not offer an 

opinion regarding the cause of an employment condition is of no probative value on the issue of 

causal relationship.12 Accordingly, Dr. Schoch’s September 16 and November 2, 2020 medical 

notes are also insufficient to establish appellant’s claim.

Dr. Schoch’s remaining medical evidence consisted of a September 28, 2020 Form CA-17. 

However, this evidence is inapplicable to appellant’s claim as it identified August 17, 2020 as the 

date of injury. Consequentially, his remaining medical evidence is insufficient to meet appellant’s 

burden of proof.

Appellant’s submitted a September 16, 2020 diagnostic report in which Dr. Mourelatos

reviewed an MRI scan of her left shoulder. The Board has held, however, that diagnostic test 

reports, standing alone, lack probative value on the issue of causal relationship as they do not 

address the relationship between accepted employment factors and a diagnosed condition.13 For 

this reason, Dr. Mourelatos’ diagnostic report is insufficient to establish her claim.

OWCP also received an information sheet describing the causes of bursitis and ways to 

treat the condition. The Board has long held that medical texts and excerpts from publications 

lack probative value in establishing the causal relationship between a claimed condition and an 

employment incident as such materials are of general application and are not determinative of 

whether the specific condition claimed is related to the particular employment factors alleged by 

the employee.14 As this information sheet was not interpreted and cited by appellant’s physicians 

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 W.M.,Docket No. 19-1853 (issued May 13, 2020); L.F., Docket No. 19-1905 (issued April10, 2020).

14 L.C., Docket No. 17-1811 (issued March 23, 2018); N.B., Docket No. 14-1702 (issued December 29, 2014);S.A., 

Docket No. 13-1551 (issued December 17, 2013); Gloria J. McPherson, 51 ECAB 441 (2000); WilliamC. Bush, 40 

ECAB 1064, 1075 (1989).
5

in offering a rationalized medical opinion as to how the May 17, 2020 employment incident caused 

her diagnosed conditions, it is insufficient to establish causal relationship.

As appellant has not submitted rationalized medical evidence establishing a left shoulder 

condition causally related to the accepted May 17, 2017 employment incident, the Board finds that 

she has not met her burden of proof to establish her claim.

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 her burden of proof to establish a left shoulder 

condition causally related to the accepted May 17, 2020 employment incident.

ORDER

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED THAT the November 27, 2020 decision of the Office of 

Workers’ Compensation Programs is affirmed.

Issued: December 17, 2021

Washington, DC

Janice B. Askin, Judge

Employees’ Compensation Appeals Board

Patricia H. Fitzgerald, Alternate Judge

Employees’ Compensation Appeals Board

Valerie D. Evans-Harrell, Alternate Judge

Employees’ Compensation Appeals Board