L.N. and U.S. Postal Service, Kedzie Grace Post Office, Chicago, IL (Board decision, October 28, 2021)
Board dismisses L.N.'s appeal of a pending medication issue (ECAB 21-0771)
Apply this precedent to your situation
This is citable Board precedent from 2021, and it may have been appealed since. Ezel checks how it stands today and answers your situation, with citations.
ECAB final decision. The Board dismissed L.N.'s appeal because OWCP had remanded the medication authorization issue for further development and had not issued a final adverse decision. A party may petition the Board for reconsideration within 30 days of issuance unless this decision specifies another period, under 20 C.F.R. § 501.7(a). FECA compensation decisions are generally not subject to court review under 5 U.S.C. § 8128(b).
Plain-English summary
L.N. sought review of an OWCP hearing representative's order concerning authorization for compounded medication. That order had vacated a denial and sent the issue back for more medical development and a new decision. The Board found it interlocutory and outside its jurisdiction. It dismissed the appeal while the OWCP issue remained pending.
Decision snapshot
- Authority: Board rule on interlocutory OWCP matters, 20 C.F.R. § 501.2(c)(2).
- Outcome: Appeal dismissed; medication issue remains before OWCP.
- Key point: An OWCP remand was not a final adverse decision reviewable by the Board.
Full text (ECAB public release)
United States Department of Labor
Employees’ Compensation Appeals Board
________
)
L.N., Appellant
)
)
and ) Docket No. 21-0771
) Issued: October 28, 2021
U.S. POSTAL SERVICE, KEDZIE GRACE
)
POST OFFICE, Chicago, IL, Employer
)
__________ )
Appearances: Case Submitted on the Record
Appellant, pro se
Office of Solicitor, for the Director
ORDER DISMISSING APPEAL
Before:
ALEC J. KOROMILAS, Chief Judge
JANICE B. ASKIN, Judge
VALERIE D. EVANS-HARRELL, Alternate Judge
On April 19, 2021 appellant filed an appeal from a January 7, 2021 decision of the Office of Workers’ Compensation Programs (OWCP). The Clerk of the Appellate Boards assigned Docket No. 21-0771.
The Board, having duly considered the matter, notes that the Board has jurisdiction to review final adverse decisions of OWCP issued under the Federal Employees’ Compensation Act. 1 This jurisdiction encompasses any final decision issued by OWCP within 180 days of the date appellant filed his appeal. 2 The case record as transmitted to the Board does not contain a final adverse decision of OWCP issued within 180 days from the date of docketing of the current appeal.3
In this regard, by a January 7, 2021 decision, OWCP’s hearing representative vacated an October 19, 2020 decision denying authorization for compounded medication, and remanded the case for further development due to an unresolved conflict in medical opinion, to be followed by a de novo decision on the issue of authorization for compounded medication. The Board finds that 1 5 U.S.C. § 8101 et seq.; 20 C.F.R. §§ 501.2(c) and 501.3(a).
2
20 C.F.R. § 501.3(e) provides in pertinent part: “Any notice of appeal must be filed within 180 days from the date of issuance of a decision of the OWCP.” 3
Id. this does not constitute a final adverse decision as it is interlocutory in nature and it has no jurisdiction with respect to any interlocutory matters decided or not decided. 4
As there is no final adverse decision issued by OWCP over which the Board may properly exercise jurisdiction, the Board concludes that the appeal docketed as No. 21 -0771 must be dismissed. Accordingly,
IT IS HEREBY ORDERED THAT the appeal docketed as No. 21-0771 is dismissed.
Issued: October 28, 2021
Washington, DC
Alec J. Koromilas, Chief Judge
Employees’ Compensation Appeals Board
Janice B. Askin, Judge
Employees’ Compensation Appeals Board
Valerie D. Evans-Harrell, Alternate Judge Employees’ Compensation Appeals Board
4
Id. at § 501.2(c)(2), which provides: “There will be no appeal with respect to any interlocutory matter decided (or not decided) by OWCP during the pendency of a case.” S.U., Docket No. 20-0636 (issued December 3, 2020); Jennifer A. Guillary, 57 ECAB 485 (2005).
2
Does this precedent still control your case?
Ezel checks whether it still stands, including any court review since, and applies it to your situation with citations.
Opens in Ezel Pro.
- Checks the law as it stands today, not only this page
- Cites every source it relies on, so you can verify it
- Chat, drafting and research in one workspace