Lamb v. Office of Personnel Management
681 F. App'x 894
| Fed. Cir. | 2017Background
- Timothy Lamb, an FBI Special Agent, faced proposed removal in Feb 2013 for off-duty unprofessional conduct and lack of candor; he was removed in Aug 2013.
- After the removal was proposed, Lamb sought mental-health treatment (counseling, diagnosis of anxiety, depression, sleep disorder) and underwent a fitness-for-duty exam in April 2013 that found him physically fit for duty (noting only mild high-frequency hearing loss).
- In June 2014 Lamb applied for immediate FERS disability retirement, claiming depression, anxiety, panic disorder, sleep disorders, tinnitus, and hearing loss prevented him from performing SA duties.
- OPM denied the application (Sept 2014), finding Lamb failed to show a disabling condition while employed; Lamb submitted additional medical records and sought reconsideration but OPM upheld the denial.
- The Merit Systems Protection Board’s administrative judge found Lamb did not prove disability while employed (medical evidence showed he was rendering useful and efficient service prior to removal); the Board issued a split nonprecedential final decision affirming OPM.
- On appeal to the Federal Circuit, the court reviewed only for legal error or procedural defects (5 U.S.C. § 7703(c) and Lindahl limitations) and affirmed for lack of reversible legal or procedural error and because it lacked jurisdiction to disturb OPM’s factual findings.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether Lamb was disabled while employed under FERS standards | Lamb argued his depression, anxiety, sleep disorder, tinnitus, and hearing loss disabled him before removal | OPM/Board argued medical record showed he was performing usefully and symptoms arose or worsened after the removal process | Held for OPM/Board — substantial-evidence finding that Lamb did not prove disability while employed affirmed |
| Whether the Board/OPM failed to consider supplemental evidence or committed procedural error | Lamb contended the Board ignored or undervalued his supplemental medical records and prior counseling | OPM/Board maintained they considered and weighed the supplemental evidence and reached a supported factual conclusion | Held for OPM/Board — no procedural or legal error shown; Court lacks jurisdiction to reweigh facts |
| Whether the causation (misconduct-related) bar affects eligibility | Lamb relied on precedent that cause of condition is irrelevant — focus should be on whether condition prevented job performance | OPM/Board argued focus was correctly on whether the condition actually impaired job performance while employed, not merely its cause | Held for OPM/Board — Board properly focused on whether condition prevented performance while employed; factual finding not reviewable |
| Whether the Federal Circuit could review OPM’s factual disability determinations | Lamb sought review of factual determinations and weight given evidence | OPM argued Lindahl/5 U.S.C. § 8461(d) limits court to legal/procedural review, not factual underpinnings | Held for OPM — Court lacks jurisdiction to review factual findings; only legal or procedural errors are reviewable |
Key Cases Cited
- Fields v. Department of Justice, 452 F.3d 1297 (Fed. Cir.) (standard of review for Board decisions)
- Consolidated Edison Co. v. National Labor Relations Board, 305 U.S. 197 (U.S.) (definition of substantial evidence)
- Anthony v. Office of Personnel Management, 58 F.3d 620 (Fed. Cir.) (limits on court review of disability determinations under Lindahl)
- Lindahl v. Office of Personnel Management, 470 U.S. 768 (U.S.) (establishing that courts cannot review factual underpinnings of OPM disability determinations)
- Vanieken-Ryals v. Office of Personnel Management, 508 F.3d 1034 (Fed. Cir.) (clarifying appellate scope in disability-retirement appeals)
- Davis v. Office of Personnel Management, 470 F.3d 1059 (Fed. Cir.) (explaining challenges to evidentiary weight are challenges to factual findings and are not reviewable)