United States Department of Labor

Employees’ Compensation Appeals Board

__________________________________________

D.D., Appellant

and

U.S. POSTAL SERVICE, POST OFFICE, 

Milwaukee, WI, Employer

__________________________________________

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

Docket No. 21-1283

Issued: May 12, 2022

Appearances: Case Submitted on the Record

Alan J. Shapiro, Esq., for the appellant1

Office of Solicitor, for the Director

ORDER GRANTING REMAND

Before:

ALEC J. KOROMILAS, Chief Judge

PATRICIA H. FITZGERALD, Deputy Chief Judge

VALERIE D. EVANS-HARRELL, Alternate Judge

JURISDICTION

On August 25, 2021 appellant, through counsel, filed a timely appeal from an August 11, 

2021 merit decision of the Office of Workers’ Compensation Programs (OWCP). The Clerk of 

the Appellate Boards assigned Docket No. 21-1283.

On December 16, 2022, the Director of OWCP filed a motion to remand, requesting that 

the Board set aside the August 11, 2021 OWCP decision and remand the case to OWCP for 

specified further medical development. He explained that appellant submitted a May 13, 2021 

letter from Dr. Alan Gegenheimer, a Board-certified orthopedic surgeon, who provided a detailed 

and rationalized opinion explaining the causal relationship between appellant’s claimed 

employment injury and factors of her federal employment. The Director pointed out that

Dr. Gegenheimer “explicitly stated” that appellant’s bilateral knee condition was employment 

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

related and that her injuries were “‘consistent with’ the increased activity associated with 

beginning work as a mail carrier.” He further stated that the rapid increased activity level and 

stress exceeds the bone modulus above the normal remodeling and healing and leads to a stress 

reaction and stress fracture. The Director concluded that although Dr. Gegenheimer’s opinion is 

insufficient to establish her claim, it is supportive and is not contradicted. Consequently, he 

requested that the Board set aside OWCP’s August 11, 2021 decision and remand he case to enable 

OWCP to further develop the claim. On remand the Director advised that it would provide

Dr. Gegenheimer with a statement of accepted facts and request a detailed rationalized medical 

opinion, followed by further development of the claim.

The Clerk of the Appellate Boards served appellant and counsel with a copy of the 

Director’s motion to remand on January 5, 2022. No response was received within the time

allotted.

The Board, having duly considered the matter, concludes that, for the reasons espoused by 

the Director in his motion to remand, said motion should be granted. Following the development 

described by the Director on remand and any such other development, OWCP shall issue a de novo 

decision on appellant’s claim. Accordingly,

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED THAT the motion to remand filed by the Director of the 

Office of Workers’ Compensation Programs is granted. The August 11, 2021 decision of OWCP 

is set aside; the case is remanded for further proceedings consistent with this order of the Board.

Issued: May 12, 2022

Washington, DC

Alec J. Koromilas, Chief Judge

Employees’ Compensation Appeals Board

Patricia H. Fitzgerald, Deputy Chief Judge

Employees’ Compensation Appeals Board

Valerie D. Evans-Harrell, Alternate Judge

Employees’ Compensation Appeals Board