United States Department of Labor

Employees’ Compensation Appeals Board

__________________________________________

J.W., Appellant

and

U.S. POSTAL SERVICE, REDMOND POST 

OFFICE, Redmond, WA, Employer

__________________________________________

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

Docket No. 23-1007

Issued: December 11, 2023

Appearances: Case Submitted on the Record

Appellant, pro se

Office of Solicitor, for the Director

ORDER REMANDING CASE

Before:

PATRICIA H. FITZGERALD, Deputy Chief Judge

JANICE B. ASKIN, Judge

VALERIE D. EVANS-HARRELL, Alternate Judge

On July 25, 2023 appellant filed a timely appeal from a June 26, 2023 merit decision of the 

Office of Workers’Compensation Programs (OWCP). The Clerk of the Appellate Boards assigned 

the appeal Docket No. 23-1007.

On April 11, 2023 appellant, then a 43-year-old city letter carrier, filed an occupational 

disease claim (Form CA-2) alleging that she sustained an injury causally related to factors of her 

federal employment of constantly picking up and dropping off packages while delivering mail.

She did not indicate the nature of the disease or illness. Appellant noted that she first became 

aware of her claimed condition on September 9, 2022, and its relationship to her federal 

employment on October 9, 2022. She did not stop work.1

OWCP received a duty status report (Form CA-17) dated March 24, 2023, from

Dr. Gregory Gutke, an occupational medicine specialist. Dr. Gutke diagnosed lateral epicondylitis 

1 OWCP assigned the present claim OWCP File No. xxxxxx262. Appellant had previously filed a Form CA-2 on 

March 21, 2023 alleging injury to her elbows and shoulders due to factors of her federal employment. She indicated 

that she became aware of the conditions on September 9, 2021, and that they were caused or aggravated by her federal 

employment on October 9, 2021. OWCP assigned that claim OWCP File No. xxxxxx030. It denied the claim by 

decision dated June 12, 2023, finding that appellant had not established the factual basis of her claim. 
2

of the right elbow. He advised that appellant could return to work on that date with a restriction 

of lifting/carrying no more than 20 pounds intermittently. 

On April 19, 2023 appellant provided a narrative statement, which OWCP received on 

April 20, 2023, explaining that the duties of her employment as a city letter carrier included 

delivering mail and packages. She noted that her route usually included delivery of 70 to 100

packages every day, some of which weighed more than 50 pounds. Appellant further noted that 

aside from delivering mail, her duties included picking up packages, loading them into her truck, 

and placing them onto front porches. She stated that approximately two years prior, possibly in 

mid-2021, she felt soreness in her arms and elbows, but did not pay attention to the soreness at that 

time. In mid-2022, she felt that her condition had worsened. 

In a development letter dated April 26, 2023, OWCP informed appellant that the evidence 

submitted was insufficient to establish her claim. It advised her of the type of factual and medical 

evidence needed and requested that she complete a provided questionnaire in order to substantiate 

the factual elements of her claim. Specifically, OWCP noted that appellant had filed another 

occupational disease claim under OWCP File No. xxxxxx030 with a date of injury of 

September 21, 2021, and requested that appellant clarify whether this was a duplicate claim or 

another claim. It afforded appellant 60 days to respond and submit additional evidence.

In a statement dated June 10, 2023, appellant clarified that she had filed a claim on 

September 9, 2022 in relation to her occupational disease. She indicated that she did not know 

that she had made two attempts to file the same claim. Appellantrequested that the duplicate claim 

be eliminated.

In a referral note for diagnostic testing dated May 19, 2023, Dr. Gutke diagnosed bilateral 

lateral epicondylitis and ulnar neuropathy of the left elbow. OWCP also received additional CA-17 

forms from Dr. Gutke dated September 26, 2022, and March 24 and May 19, 2023.

By decision dated June 26, 2023, OWCP denied appellant’s occupational disease claim, 

finding that the evidence of record was insufficient to establish the factual basis of her claim. It 

related that appellant had not responded to the development letter of April 26, 2023. OWCP also 

noted that it was still unclear as to which claim appellant wanted to pursue. OWCP concluded, 

therefore, that the requirements had not been met to establish an injury as defined by FECA. 

The Board, having duly considered this matter, finds that the case is not in posture for 

decision. 

In the case of William A. Couch,

2

the Board held that when adjudicating a claim, OWCP is 

obligated to consider and address all evidence properly submitted by a claimant and received by 

OWCP before the final decision is issued. As previously noted, appellant submitted a narrative 

statement dated April 19, 2023, which was received by OWCP on April 20, 2023, wherein she 

provided a detailed description of the employment factors she believed caused injury to her upper 

2

41 ECAB 548, 553 (1990); see also Order Remanding Case, T.F., Docket No. 22-0015 (issued May 16, 2022);

Order Remanding Case, F.A., Docket No. 20-1324 (issued March 1, 2021); T.G., Docket No. 19-1930 (issued 

January 8, 2021).
3

extremities. However, the record does not indicate that OWCP reviewed this additional evidence 

in its June 26, 2023 decision, which found that appellant had not established the factual aspects of 

her claim. It, thus, failed to follow its procedures by not considering and addressing the relevant 

evidence of record.3

The Board further notes that OWCP’s procedures provide that cases should be 

administratively combined when correct adjudication depends on frequent cross-referencing 

between files and where two or more injuries occur to the same part of the body. 4 In the present 

claim OWCP further noted that it was unclear as to whether OWCP File No. xxxxxx030 was a 

duplicate claim. The Board finds that this issue must be resolved by administratively combining

OWCP File No. xxxxxx030 and the present claim under File No. xxxxxx262, as correct 

adjudication depends on cross-referencing between these files and the claimed injury or injuries 

appear to have occurred to the same part of the body. For a full and fair adjudication, the claims 

in OWCP File Nos. xxxxxx030 and xxxxxx262 shall be administratively combined by OWCP.

As the Board’s decisions are final as to the subject matter appealed, it is crucial that OWCP 

consider and address all evidence received prior to the issuance of its decision. 5 For this reason, 

the case will be remanded to OWCP to review all relevant evidence submitted in both claims. 

Following this and other such further development as OWCP deems necessary, it shall issue a 

de novo decision. Accordingly,

3 OWCP’s procedures provide that all evidence submitted should be reviewed and discussed in the decision. 

Evidence received following development that lacks probative value also should be acknowledged. Whenever 

possible, the evidence should be referenced by author and date. Federal (FECA) Procedure Manual, Part 2 --Claims, 

Initial Denials, Chapter 2.1401.5b(2) (November 2012).

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

(February 2000).

5 Order Remanding Case, G.A.,Docket No. 19-1080 (issued January 2, 2020);Order Remanding Case, T.J., Docket 

No. 14-1854 (issued February 3, 2015); Order Remanding Case, J.J., Docket No. 12-1062 (issued December 12, 

2012); Willard McKennon, 51 ECAB 145 (1999); Linda Johnson, 45 ECAB 439 (1994). See also Order Remanding 

Case, C.S., Docket No. 18-1760 (issued November 25, 2019); Yvette N. Davis, 55 ECAB 475 (2004). 
4

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED THAT the June 26, 2023 decision of the Office of Workers’

Compensation Programs is set aside and the case is remanded to OWCP for further proceedings 

consistent with this order of the Board.

Issued: December 11, 2023

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