United States Department of Labor

Employees’ Compensation Appeals Board

__________________________________________

M.M., Appellant

and

U.S. POSTAL SERVICE, SHELBY TOWNSHIP 

POST OFFICE, Shelby Township, MI, Employer

__________________________________________

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

Docket No. 23-0549

Issued: October 16, 2023

Appearances: Case Submitted on the Record

Appellant, pro se

Office of Solicitor, for the Director

ORDER REMANDING CASE

Before:

ALEC J. KOROMILAS, Chief Judge

PATRICIA H. FITZGERALD, Deputy Chief Judge

JAMES D. McGINLEY, Alternate Judge

On March 13, 2023 appellant filed a timely appeal from a March 1, 2023 merit decision of 

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

assigned the appeal Docket No. 23-0549.

On December 22, 2022 appellant, then a 30-year-old passport and visa examiner, filed a 

traumatic injury claim (Form CA-1) alleging that on December 21, 2022 she sustained a right 

shoulder muscle strain when a former employee pulled a space heater from her arms several times

while in the performance of duty. She stopped work on December 22, 2022. 

In support of her claim, appellant submitted December 22 and 27, 2022 reports from 

James Gentile, a physician assistant, documenting his treatment for right shoulder strain. The 

December 22, 2022 report noted that she complained of shoulder pain after a coworker tried to rip 

a space heater out of her hands. 

In a January 25, 2023 development letter, OWCP informed appellant of the deficiencies of 

her claim. It advised her of the type of factual and medical evidence required and provided a 

questionnaire for her completion. In a separate development letter of even date, OWCP requested 

that the employing establishment provide additional information pertaining to the December 21, 

2022 employment incident. It afforded both parties 30 days to respond. 
2

On February 18, 2023 OWCP received a January 20, 2023 assault and threat specialty 

report, produced by the Postal Inspection Service of the employing establishment, which 

summarized the events involving appellant at work on December 21, 2022. The investigative 

report provided detailed accounts and findings from various parties addressing appellant’s

allegation of a physical altercation with a former employee on that date. 

By decision dated March 1, 2023, OWCP denied appellant’s traumatic injury claim, 

finding that the evidence of record was insufficient to establish that the December 21, 2022 

employment incident occurred as alleged. It noted that she had not provided a response to its 

development questionnaire. 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 this case is not in posture for 

decision.1

In the case of William A. Couch,

2

the Board held that, when adjudicating a claim, OWCP 

is obligated to review all evidence properly submitted by a claimant and received by OWCP before 

the final decision is issued. While OWCP is not required to list every piece of evidence submitted 

to the record, the record is clear that the January 23, 2023 assault and threat specialty report of the 

Postal Inspection Service detailing the events surrounding the claimed December 21, 2022 

employment incident was not referenced or reviewed by OWCP in its March 1, 2023 decision.3 

As it did not consider or address this factual evidence of record, it failed to follow its own 

procedures by not considering all relevant factual reports of record.4

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

reviews all evidence received prior to the issuance of its final decision.5 The Board finds that this 

case is not in posture for decision as OWCP did not review the above-noted evidence in its 

March 1, 2023 decision.6

On remand, OWCP shall consider and address all evidence of record. Following this and 

other such further development as deemed necessary, it shall issue a de novo decision.7 

Accordingly,

1

See K.Y., Docket No. 22-0743 (issued December 1, 2022).

2

41 ECAB 548 (1990); see also R.D., Docket No. 17-1818 (issued April 3, 2018).

3 W.W., Docket No. 21-1432 (issued February 23, 2023); J.N., Docket No. 21-0086 (issued May 17, 2021); C.D., 

Docket No. 20-0168 (issued March 5, 2020).

4 G.A., Docket No. 21-0862 (issued June 8, 2022); E.P., Docket No. 20-0655 (issued March 17, 2021).

5

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

William A. Couch, supra note 2.

6

See V.C., Docket No. 16-0694 (issued August 19, 2016).

7

See K.P., Docket No. 21-1065 (issued March 30, 2022); B.N., Docket No. 17-0787 (issued July 6, 2018).
3

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED THAT the March 1, 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: October 16, 2023

Washington, DC

Alec J. Koromilas, Chief Judge

Employees’ Compensation Appeals Board

Patricia H. Fitzgerald, Deputy Chief Judge

Employees’ Compensation Appeals Board

James D. McGinley, Alternate Judge

Employees’ Compensation Appeals Board