M.S. and U.S. Postal Service (Board decision, October 30, 2024)

ECAB final decision. The Board dismissed the appeal because the challenged OWCP decisions were void. A party may petition the Board for reconsideration within 30 days of issuance unless this order 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

A postal employee appealed a May 2023 OWCP decision involving a COVID-19 claim. The Board had since vacated an earlier Board decision on the same claim, making the intervening OWCP decisions null and void. With no valid adverse OWCP decision to review, it dismissed the appeal.

Decision snapshot

• Authority: Federal Employees' Compensation Act, 5 U.S.C. § 8101 et seq.
• Outcome: Appeal dismissed; intervening OWCP decisions were void.
• Key point: A void underlying appellate decision can remove the basis for later OWCP decisions.

Full text (ECAB public release)

United States Department of Labor
Employees’ Compensation Appeals Board

________
)
M.S., Appellant
)
)
Docket No. 23-0890
and ) Issued: October 30, 2024
)
U.S. POSTAL SERVICE, POST OFFICE )
MEDICAL UNIT, Detroit, MI, Employer )
__________ )

Appearances: Case Submitted on the Record
Alan J. Shapiro, Esq., for the appellant1
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 June 19, 2023 appellant, through counsel, filed a timely appeal from a May 24, 2023 merit decision of the Office of Workers’ Compensation Programs (OWCP). The Clerk of the Appellate Boards assigned the appeal Docket No. 23-0890.

By decision dated August 8, 2022, the Board affirmed OWCP’s January 7, 2022 decision, under Docket No. 22-0417, finding that appellant had not met her burden of proof to establish COVID-19 causally related to the accepted March 19, 2020 employment exposure. The Board explained that the medical evidence of record was insufficient to establish a diagnosis of COVID-19 in connection with the accepted employment-related exposure. 2

Upon return of the case record to OWCP appellant requested reconsideration. By decisions dated September 21, 2022 and May 24, 2023, OWCP denied modification of its prior

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 Docket No. 22-0417 (issued August 8, 2022). decisions, finding that the medical evidence of record was insufficient to establish a diagnosis of COVID-19 causally related to appellant’s accepted March 19, 2020 employment exposure.

On October 24, 2024 the Board issued an order vacating prior decision and reinstating appeal under Docket No. 22-0417, finding that the August 8, 2022 Board decision was void ab initio and of no effect. The Board issued a new decision on October 24, 2024.

The Board, having duly considered the matter, finds that because the Board voided the prior August 8, 2022 decision under Docket No. 22-0417, the subsequent decisions issued by OWCP are null and void. 3

Pursuant to 5 U.S.C. § 8149 and 20 C.F.R. §§ 501.2(c) and 501.3(a), the Board’s jurisdiction is limited to the review of final adverse decisions of OWCP issued under the Federal Employees’ Compensation Act. 4 As the August 8, 2022 Board decision is void ab initio, OWCP’s subsequent decisions dated September 21, 2022 and May 24, 2023 are null and void. 5 There is no final adverse decision over which the Board may properly take jurisdiction. Therefore, the Board finds that the appeal docketed as No. 23-0890 is dismissed. Accordingly,

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED THAT the appeal docketed as No. 23-0890 is dismissed.

Issued: October 30, 2024
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

3
See Order Dismissing Appeal, P.H., Docket No. 21-0945 (issued March 16, 2022); Douglas E. Billings, 41 ECAB 880 (1990). 4 5 U.S.C. § 8101 et seq.; 20 C.F.R. §§ 501.2(c) and 501.3(a).
5
See supra note 3.

2