United States Department of Labor

Employees’ Compensation Appeals Board

__________________________________________

M.A., Appellant

and

U.S. POSTAL SERVICE, DETROIT 

PROCESSING & DISTRIBUTION CENTER, 

Detroit, MI, Employer

__________________________________________

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

Docket No. 23-0813

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

VALERIE D. EVANS-HARRELL, Alternate Judge

JAMES D. McGINLEY, Alternate Judge

On May 19, 2023 appellant filed a timely appeal from an April 18, 2023 merit decision of 

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

assigned the appeal Docket No. 23-0813.

This case has previously been before the Board on a different issue.

1

 The facts and 

circumstances of the case as set forth in the Board’s prior decision are incorporated herein by 

reference. The relevant facts are as follows.

On March 13, 2013 appellant, then a 48-year-old general clerk, filed a traumatic injury 

claim (Form CA-1) alleging that on February 14, 2013 she injured her shoulders and left hip when 

she fell from her chair while in the performance of duty. By decision datedApril 15, 2013, OWCP 

accepted the claim for a partial tear of the right rotator cuff. It paid appellant wage-loss 

compensation on the supplemental rolls, effective April 1, 2013,and on the periodic rolls, effective 

June 2, 2013.

1 Docket No. 20-0317 (issued October 9, 2020).
2

On March 5, 2023 appellant filed a claim for compensation (Form CA-7) for a schedule 

award. 

In a development letter dated March 14, 2023, OWCP requested that appellant submit a 

detailed medical report from her physician addressing the permanent impairment due to her 

accepted employment injury in accordance the sixth edition of the American Medical Association, 

Guides to the Evaluation of Permanent Impairment (A.M.A., Guides).2 It afforded her 30 days to 

submit the requested information. OWCP advised appellant that, if her physician was unable to 

provide such a report, appellant should notify them in writing, and if the evidence showed a 

work-related permanent impairment of a scheduled member that, was insufficient to determine the 

extent of permanent impairment, it would refer her for a second opinion examination.

Appellant subsequently submitted a February 6, 2023 note from Dr. Kanwar V. 

Mendiratta, a Board-certified pulmonologist, relating that she fell at work in February 2013, and 

sustained injuries to her chest wall, lungs, and ribs. Dr. Mendiratta noted that he had examined 

her at the time and diagnosed pulmonary contusion and chest wall contusion. He related that 

appellant had been treated by other physicians for her ongoing complaints of pain and difficulty 

breathing. Dr. Mendiratta advised that she was completely disabled. 

OWCP also received copies of medical reports previously of record, as well as diagnostic 

testing results not previously submitted, including a magnetic resonance imaging scan of the right 

shoulder. 

By decision dated April 18, 2023, OWCP denied appellant’s schedule award claim. In its 

decision, it noted that it had not received any evidence in response to its development letter. 

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

decision.

In the case of William A. Couch,

3

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 detailed above, OWCP received medical evidence, 

including a February 6, 2023 note from Dr. Mendiratta relating appellant’s history of injury and 

advising that she was totally disabled from work. It, however, did not review this evidence in its 

April 18, 2023 merit decision. OWCP, thus, failed to follow its procedures by not considering all 

of the relevant evidence of record.4

2 A.M.A., Guides (6th ed. 2009).

3

41 ECAB 548 (1990); see also K.B., Docket No. 20-1320 (issued February 8, 2021); R.D., Docket No. 17-1818 

(issued April 3, 2018).

4 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).
3

As Board decisions are final with regard to the subject matter appealed, it is crucial that 

OWCP consider and address all relevant evidence received prior to the issuance of its final 

decision.5 On remand, OWCP shall consider and address all evidence properly submitted by 

appellant prior to the issuance of the April 18, 2023 OWCP decision. Following this and other 

such further development as deemed necessary, it shall issue a de novo decision. Accordingly,

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED THAT the April 18, 2023 decision of the Office of Workers’

Compensation Programs is set aside, and the case is remanded 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

Valerie D. Evans-Harrell, Alternate Judge

Employees’ Compensation Appeals Board

James D. McGinley, Alternate Judge

Employees’ Compensation Appeals Board

5 Order Remanding Case, E.D., Docket No. 20-0620 (issued November 18, 2020);see also Order Remanding Case, 

L.B., Docket No. 21-0140 (issued August 25, 2021); Order Remanding Case, C.S., Docket No. 18-1760 (issued 

November 25, 2019); Yvette N. Davis, 55 ECAB 475 (2004); William A. Couch, supra note 3.