(a) The provisions of this part pertaining to the uniformed services cover each agency employee who enters into such service regardless of whether the employee is located in the United States or overseas. However, an employee serving under a time-limited appointment completes any unexpired portion of his or her appointment upon return from uniformed service.
(b) The provisions of this part concerning employee injury cover a civil officer or employee in any branch of the Government of the United States, including an officer or employee of an instrumentally wholly owned by the United States, who was separated or furloughed from an appointment without time limitation, or from a temporary appointment pending establishment of a register (TAPER) as a result of a compensable injury; but do not include—
(1) A commissioned officer of the Regular Corps of the Public Health Service;
(2) A commissioned officer of the Reserve Corps of the Public Health Service on active duty; or
(3) A commissioned officer of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration.
[60 FR 45652, Sept. 1, 1995, as amended at 64 FR 31487, June 11, 1999]
Notes of Decisions
Cynthia K. Walley v. Dep't of Vets. Affairs, 279 F.3d 1010 (Fed. Cir. 2002).
· cites it 2× “’”) (citing 5 C.F.R. § 353.103 (b)). 11 Hence *1020 the burden of proof properly remained with the employee at a hearing on that issue.”
Gallo v. Dep't of Transp., 689 F.3d 1294 (Fed. Cir. 2012).
· cites it 4× “OPM regulation 5 C.F.R. § 353.103 (b) defines an eligible employee under § 8151(a) as one “who was separated or furloughed from an appointment without time limitation .”
Pryor v. United States, 85 Fed. Cl. 97 (Fed. Cl. 2008).
“” 5 C.F.R. § 353.103 (b) (2008). Plaintiff did not leave the Army because of her injuries; rather, she voluntarily resigned.”
Gallo v. United States, 76 Fed. Cl. 593 (Fed. Cl. 2007).
· cites it 3× “Similarly, 5 C.F.R. § 353.103 , titled “Persons covered,” provides that Part 353’s protections apply only to employees who are separated or furloughed as a result of a compensable injury.”
Delalat v. Dep't of the Air Force, 557 F.3d 1342 (Fed. Cir. 2009).
“5 C.F.R. § 353.103 (b). Mr. Delalat clearly fits within the broad statutory and regulatory definitions of “employee;” he has already been classified as an employee under the FECA for purposes of receiving OWCP benefits; and neither the FECA generally nor the FECA’s restoration…”
Bridgette Cobb v. United States Postal Serv. (MSPB 2015).
· cites it 5× “474 , 476 (1998); 5 C.F.R. § 353.103 (b). In this case, it is undisputed that the agency separated the appellant from an appointment with a time limitation, although she alleges that her compensable injury was the reason for her termination rather than the expiration of her…”
Linoski v. Dep't of Just., 113 F. App'x 406 (Fed. Cir. 2004).
· cites it 3× “301 (c); see 5 C.F.R. § 353.103 (b). In pertinent part, 5 C.”
Bagunas v. United States Postal Serv., 174 F. App'x 555 (Fed. Cir. 2006).
· cites it 2× “” 5 CFR § 353.103 (b) (2005). To establish restoration rights, a petitioner must prove by preponderant evidence (1) that he suffered a compensable injury or the recurrence of such an injury; (2) that his OWCP benefits were terminated on the basis that he fully recovered from his…”
Brenda A. Jakes v. Dep't of Def. (MSPB 2016).
“562 , ¶ 9 (2008); 5 C.F.R. § 353.103 (b). In the present case, it is undisputed that the appellant suffered a compensable injury and that her separation from Federal service was a result of her compensable injury.”
— 5 C.F.R. § 353.103(b) — 1 case
— 5 C.F.R. § 353.103(c)(1) — 1 case
Bridgette Cobb v. United States Postal Serv. (MSPB 2015).
“474 , 476 (1998); 5 C.F.R. § 353.103 (b). In this case, it is undisputed that the agency separated the appellant from an appointment with a time limitation, although she alleges that her compensable injury was the reason for her termination rather than the expiration of her…”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the
Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and
treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.