United States Department of Labor

Employees’ Compensation Appeals Board

__________________________________________

M.J., Appellant

and

U.S. POSTAL SERVICE, CITY OF INDUSTRY 

POST OFFICE, City of Industry, CA, Employer

__________________________________________

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

Docket No. 22-1357

Issued: June 12, 2023

Appearances: Case Submitted on the Record

Sally F. LaMacchia, Esq., for the appellant1

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 September 26, 2022 appellant, through counsel, filed a timely appeal from a July 14, 

2022 merit decision of the Office of Workers’ Compensation Programs (OWCP). The Clerk of 

the Appellate Boards assigned Docket No. 22-1357.2

On January 13, 2020 appellant, then a 32-year-old clerk, filed a traumatic injury claim 

(Form CA-1) alleging that on January 10, 2020 she sustained anxiety/a panic attack when D.A., a 

manager, allegedly harassed her for leaving her workstation while in the performance of duty. She

became very anxious and requested medical assistance. In a statement, appellant indicated that 

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 The Board notes that following the July 14, 2022 decision appellant submitted additional evidence to OWCP. 

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. Id.
2

R.M., a manager, allegedly refused to aid her and instead stated that he would contact law 

enforcement to have her removed from the employing establishment. Appellant stopped work on 

January 10, 2020 and sought immediate treatment at a hospital emergency department. OWCP 

assigned the claim OWCP File No. xxxxxx318.

Appellant had previously filed an occupational disease claim (Form CA-2) for anxiety and 

stress due to employment factors commencing November 16, 2019. OWCP assigned the claim 

OWCP File No. xxxxxx229. In a February 14, 2020 statement, appellant attributed her emotional 

condition, in part, to harassment and verbal abuse on November 16, 2019, by the same managers 

allegedly involved in the January 10, 2020 employment incident.

By decision dated June 25, 2020, OWCP denied appellant’s claim for an employmentrelated emotional condition, finding that the evidence of record was insufficient to establish that 

the injury and/or events occurred as alleged.

On June 22, 2021 appellant, through counsel, requested reconsideration and submitted 

additional evidence, including a March 4, 2020 Equal Employment Opportunity (EEO) affidavit 

by D.A. noting that appellant had “altercations with [him]” prior to January 10, 2020 “which had 

also been documented.”

By decision dated June 30, 2021, OWCP denied modification of the prior decision.

On June 2, 2022 appellant, through counsel, requested reconsideration. Counsel noted that 

a November 16, 2019 verbal altercation with managers contributed to appellant’s emotional 

condition under the present claim.

By decision dated July 14, 2022, OWCP denied modification of the prior decision.

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

decision.

OWCP’s procedures provide that cases should be administratively combined when correct 

adjudication depends on cross-referencing between files and where two or more injuries occur to 

the same part of the body.3 For example, if a new injury case is reported for an employee who 

previously filed an injury claim for a similar condition or the same part of the body, doubling is 

required.4 In the instant case, OWCP File No. xxxxxx318, appellant filed a traumatic injury claim 

for employment-related anxiety arising from January 10, 2020 interactions with managers. The 

Board notes that her prior claim under OWCP File No. xxxxxx229 also involved a claim for 

employment-related anxiety and stress precipitated by interactions with the same managers

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

(February 2000).

4

Id.; Order Remanding Case,L.G., Docket No. 18-1676 (issued August 22, 2019); Order Remanding Case,D.L., 

Docket No. 17-1588 (issued January 28, 2019).
3

commencing November 16, 2019. However, appellant’s claims have not been administratively 

combined.

For a full and fair adjudication, this case shall be remanded to OWCP to administratively 

combine the current case record, OWCP File No. xxxxxx318, with OWCP File No. xxxxxx229.5 

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

de novo decision.6

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED THAT the July 14, 2022 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: June 12, 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

5

See R.L., Docket No. 22-0603 (issued September 16, 2022); Order Remanding Case, S.R., Docket No. 21-0400 

(issued April 25, 2022); Order Remanding Case, C.Y., Docket No. 20-1079 (issued December 7, 2020); Order 

Remanding Case, K.T., Docket No. 17-0432 (issued August 17, 2018).

6

See R.L., id.; S.R., id.; Order Remanding Case, J.W., Docket Nos. 21-0588 & 21-0599 (issued January 21, 2022); 

Order Remanding Case,T.L., Docket No. 18-0935 (issued February 25, 2020);Order Remanding Case,T.M., Docket 

No. 18-0887 (issued February 21, 2019).