J.N. and DHS

Work Comp Central article re FECA 07-14-11

Following hearings in April and May 2011 held by two different Committees in the House of Representatives, staffers for one of the committees is reportedly working on a piece of legislation to be proposed after the July 4th holiday that would reform the system of workers’ compensation for federal employees (known ass “FECA”).

Earlier this year, OWCP unveiled its “FIERA” [Federal Injured Employees' Reemployment Act] proposal, which would effect many changes in the law including an overall decrease in workers’ compensation benefits. OWCP’s proposal, however, met with opposition from federal unions and some members of Congress at the hearings. At this point, there is an effort to create a bipartisan reform bill that reportedly will differ from OWCP’s proposal.

QUICK SUMMARY OF OWCP’S FIERA PROPOSAL PACKAGE

Vocational rehabilitation – can start six months after an injury, even if the employee is not yet considered permanently disabled. Increases maintenance allowance paid to workers in rehab by 50%. Allows OWCP to reimburse employers who hire a previously injured federal worker for up to three years, and allows OWCP to reimburse federal agencies that reemploy injured workers after they suffer a recurrence of disability.

Total disability rates for new injuries payable at 70% of wages for all employees instead of at the current 66-2/3% or 75% of wages (for employees with dependents).

Total disability rates, for new injuries or periods of disability, reduced from 75% or 66-2/3% of wages to 50% of wages after the employee reaches Social Security retirement age and has been receiving benefits for at least a year.

Schedule award benefits payable at 70% of wages for all employees instead of at 66-2/3% or 75% of wages. All awards to be calculated on the pay rate of a GS-11 step 3 employee regardless of the injured employee’s actual wages. Awards to be paid in a lump sum, and also may be paid while employee is receiving wage-loss benefits.

Schedule awards for disfigurement increased from maximum of $3,500.00 to maximum of $50,000.00, for new injuries, with this maximum adjusted yearly for cost-of-living increases.
Requires all disabled claimants receiving benefits for total or partial disability to report earnings, but eliminates this requirement, and the requirement to participate in vocational rehabilitation, after employee’s benefits are reduced due to reaching Social Security retirement age.

Death benefits payable at a maximum of 70% of deceased employee’s wages for all dependents, reduced from current 75% maximum. Adds domestic partners as eligible survivors.

Continuation of Pay [COP] to be recouped by OWCP from third party settlements and credited to federal employing agency that paid it – currently COP cannot be recouped. 45-day period of COP increased to 135 days for employees injured in a zone of armed conflict, and COP for those employees is available for both traumatic and occupational disease claims.

Burial expense reimbursement maximum increased from $800.00 to $6,000.00 for new death claims.

Adds physicians’ assistants and nurse practitioners to the list of recognized medical providers.

Requires employees who have retired to permanently elect to receive either OWCP benefits or retirement (CSRS or FERS) benefits within a reasonable time after retiring.

Imposes a new sanction (suspension of benefits) against employees who fail to cooperate with OWCP field nurses.

Allows new automatic matching of FECA recipients to those receiving earnings per Social Security records to eliminate improper payments.

Allows reimbursement of claims administration expenses to be paid from the Employees’ Compensation Fund and requires federal agencies to pay their fair share of these costs back to OWCP.

MAIN CRITICISMS THAT HAVE BEEN VOICED ABOUT OWCP’S FIERA PROPOSALS

Total disability benefits should not be reduced from 75% to 70% for employees with dependents, as those employees have higher living expenses.

Schedule award benefits should not be calculated on the pay rate of a GS-11 step 3 employee, as that would drastically reduce awards for higher-paid employees.

Death benefits should not be reduced from current maximum of 75% of deceased employee’s wages for all dependents to a maximum of 70%, since some deceased employees have several dependents and the number of such claims is relatively small.

Employees who have retired should not be required to permanently elect to receive either OWCP benefits or retirement (CSRS or FERS) benefits, since some of them retired early on disability retirement while their OWCP claim was not yet even decided, and they should not lose the much higher OWCP benefit if and when it is granted.

CURRENT STATUS

Our office will continue to monitor any legislative proposals that are being discussed, and will be voicing our comments on how such changes might affect injured workers.

© 2011 by Steven E. Brown, A Professional Law Corporation – all rights reserved.

• EEO Complaint

If you have been subject to the NRP since May 5, 2006 and were or are a permanent rehab or limited duty employee of the Postal Service, then you are likely already considered part of the McConnell class action law suit filed against the Postal Service because of the NRP. The Office of Federal Operations (OFO) defined the class as “all permanent rehabilitation employees and limited duty employees at the agency who have been subjected to the NRP from May 5, 2006, to the present, allegedly in violation of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973.”

For details of the McConnell class action, visit the website established by the attorneys representing the class, Thomas & Solomon LLP, at the following website http://www.nrpclassaction.com/.

We recommend that employees subject to the NRP still file an individual EEO complaint upon receipt of your NRP letter as many employees have issues that fall outside of the class action complaint, or they might not be members of the class. There is some question about whether the OFO’s definition of the class as including employees from “May 5, 2006, to the present..” means that employees subject to the NRP after the date of the OFO order (July 14, 2010) are automatically included in the class. Logically, they should be, but it is not clear. Worst case, the Administrative Judge handling your individual complaint will determine that you fall under the class action.

• Retirement

Retirement does not preclude participating in the McConnell class nor does it preclude any of the other options that will be discussed below.

Immediate “Regular” Retirement

An employee with the requisite age and years of service may simply opt to begin receiving his or her retirement. Please visit the Office of Personnel Management website for further details about the Federal Employees Retirement System (FERS) (http://www.opm.gov/retire/pre/fers/eligibility.asp) and the Civil Service Retirement System (CSRS) (http://www.opm.gov/retire/pre/csrs/eligibility.asp) age and years eligibility information.  Check with your HR department if you are unclear as to how many years of service you need based on your age.

Disability Retirement

If you do not meet the age and years requirements for immediate retirement under FERS or CSRS, you may still be eligible to begin receiving your retirement pension if your injury prevents you from rendering useful and efficient service in your position of record. Temporary or light duty positions that are composed of duties of various different positions within the Postal Service are typically not considered an employee’s position of record. Even if an employee has been working in a light duty position for years (even decades), his or her position of record is usually the position he or she was working when the injury that necessitated the light/modified duty occurred.  For example, if a letter carrier suffers a knee injury and can no longer deliver mail because of a medical condition, that letter carrier is likely to be eligible to retire on disability regardless of whether he or she has been working light or modified duty.  Further details about the type of evidence required to receive disability retirement, please review this article http://www.federal-law.com/medical-evidence-for-disability-retirement

• FECA claims

 Existing FECA claim

A detailed discussion of the rights of a worker who has an accepted FECA claim is contained http://www.federal-law.com/national-reassessment-process-at-the-postal-service. Briefly, an employee with an accepted FECA claim who is working light or modified duty because of the employee’s accepted industrial condition will be entitled to wage loss compensation if OWCP has not yet made a Loss of Wage Earning Capacity (LWEC) determination for that employee.

An LWEC determination establishes the amount of wages that an employee has lost based because of the employee’s work related injury. OWCP typically establishes LWEC by comparing the amount of money that an employee made pre-injury with what the employee is currently earning in the employee’s present position. Often, the Postal Service will continue paying an employee working light or modified duty at the same rate the employee was receiving on the date of injury, in which case the LWEC will be zero. The Employee Compensation Appeals Board (ECAB) has determined that in such a case, the termination of the light or modified duty position does not constitute a recurrence and therefore does not entitle the employee to begin receiving wage los compensation if the employee has an LWEC in place. (see K.R., ECAB Docket No 09-415 Feb 4, 2010) http://www.dol.gov/ecab/decisions/2010/Feb/09-0415.htm

However, there are several reasons why an LWEC determination can be overturned. One is if the employee’s medical condition has worsened. This can be shown through objective medical evidence showing a material worsening of the medical condition and corresponding decrease in the employees’ functioning, and/or if the LWEC was made on the basis of “makeshift” or “odd-lot” positions. For more details regarding what constitutes a makeshift or odd-lot position, please see the ECAB’s decision in A.J., ECAB Docket No. 10-619 June 29, 2010 (http://www.dol.gov/ecab/decisions/2010/Jun/10-0619P.htm). LWECs based on such positions are invalid. Please note that an employee can argue that the employee’s LWEC was made in error or that the employee’s medical condition has gotten worse even if the LWEC was established many years ago.  

New FECA claim

Some injured workers subject to the NRP have never filed FECA claims. The reasoning we have heard is that they were given light duty and did not want to jeopardize employment by filing a FECA claim. The general rule is that a claim must be filed within 3 years of the injury or within 3 years of the date of last exposure to the injurious condition or within 3 years of when the employee knew or should have known that the employee had a work related injury. This last issue often arises in cases of asbestosis where the condition is sometimes not discovered for decades after the last exposure.

An exception to the general rule is a situation in which the employee has disclosed the injury to his or her supervisor and has indicated that he or she feels that the injury is work related. If the injury and belief that the injury is work-related was disclosed to the employer within the 3 year period, a claim may be filed with OWCP even if the 3 year period has now passed. For example, we had an employee, a federal law enforcement officer, who had a heart attack in the late 1980s. His supervisor came and visited him at the hospital and our client told him he felt it was related to a high speed chase he was involved in earlier in the day. He recovered from the injury and went back to work. He did not file a claim at that time. Nearly 20 years later, he was still having issues with his heart and contacted our office. He obtained a statement from his supervisor at the time indicating that he was aware of the condition and that our client had stated he felt it was work related. We filed a new claim and it was accepted. So, it is not necessarily too late to file a new claim even if the 3 years have passed.

• MSPB Restoration claim

 A detailed discussion of the merits of filing a restoration claim are discussed in detail in this article NRP – MSPB litigation regarding restoration rights for USPS workers (http://www.federal-law.com/nrp-%E2%80%93-mspb-litigation-regarding-restoration-rights-for-usps-workers). Summarized briefly, an MSPB appeal of a Postal Service action sending home an industrially injured worker under NRP may serve as the basis of a successful case on the following grounds:

1. The agency must show that it did a search for a vacant, funded position that the appellant could perform, not just at his duty station, but within his general commuting area as well. Otherwise, the regulation’s requirements have not been met and the case should be set for hearing (see Irma Urena, Docket No. SF-0353-09-0650-I-1, December 14, 2009).

2. If the employee can show that there were vacant, funded positions that were available that he could do at the time he was removed, an MSPB Judge may find a violation of restoration rights.

However, cases that have been successful on the first ground do not necessarily lead to the employee being returned to a position within the USPS. The USPS just has to do a wider search after the case has been remanded. There is no guarantee that a wider search will find a position for the injured worker. So, although an employee may win at MSPB, it may ultimately turn out to be a hollow victory.

Summary

As you can see, there are many options available to injured workers targeted by the NRP. None of the options listed above is mutually exclusive. That is, one can file a FECA claim, disability retirement claim, EEOC claim and restoration claim at the same time. Please contact our office if you have questions about or require assistance with any of the above options. We will be happy to arrange for a consultation where we can review your specific situation and discuss which options are the best for you.

NELA conference powerpoint 2010w

Addtnl & Alt Remedies for Disabled EEO Compainants & MSPB Appellants

The more complicated question is what happens to your wage loss benefits. Most people are surprised to know that wage loss benefits are not automatically forfeit by a termination for cause or resignation.

The key factor in determining whether you will continue to receive or start to receive wage loss after resignation/termination is *why* you are no longer earning wages. If you can show, through competent medical evidence, that you were not capable of earning wages regardless of whether you had resigned or been terminated, you will retain your right to benefits.

What benefits you receive, if any, will depend on a variety of factors including whether you are working at the time of your resignation/termination, what type of employment you held at the time of termination (full time/part time/ modified duty), whether OWCP has established your loss of wage earning capacity, whether there is light duty available to you, whether the position you are working in has been found suitable by OWCP, etc..

Before making any decision with regard to whether to resign or whether to fight a proposed termination make sure to consult with an attorney knowledgeable in matters relating specifically to federal employees.

TERMINATIONS OR REDUCTION IN HOURS

• What if you have been away from work for a year and your agency terminates you for medical unavailability?

This is a very common scenario. A client will get a letter from the employing agency proposing to terminate him/her for being medically unavailable. The typical first reaction is panic that such removal will negatively impact receipt of OWCP benefits. Relax – it will not. In fact, a removal for medical reasons, assuming your medical condition is related to your work injury, is solid proof that you have lost wages due to your injury. It also shows that the agency does not have light duty available for you.

You should also be sure to look into applying for FERS or CSRS disability retirement as a removal for medical reasons will typically entitle you to a presumption of disability under FERS and CSRS.

• What if you are currently disabled and your agency removes you for cause?

If you are on leave without pay and collecting workers compensation due to a work-related medical condition that renders you disabled, and your agency decides to terminate you for cause (such as poor performance, insubordination, failure to provide medical updates, failure to follow leave procedures, etc.), you will continue to be entitled to wage-loss. The reason is that your medical condition is causing you to be unable to work, regardless of whether or not your employer held a position for you. An injured worker does not need to be employed by the federal government to be eligible for wage-loss. Again, the focus is on why you are not working. If you are not working solely because you were terminated for cause, you do not get wage loss. If you are not working because you are physically or psychologically unable to work due to a work-related injury, you can get wage loss. There are provisions that prohibit employees convicted of certain crimes, such as fraud, from receiving wage loss. So, if you have been terminated because you were found guilty of a crime you may not be eligible for wage loss benefits.

• What if you are working part time and receiving wage loss for the rest of the day that you are not working?

The Employees Compensation Appeals Board addressed this specifically in Janice J. Green, Docket No. 96-874 ECAB (1998). In that case, the claimant was removed for cause while she was working 4 hours per day and collecting 4 hours of OWCP wage-loss compensation. When she was terminated for cause, OWCP cut off all of her wage-loss benefits. She appealed. The ECAB overturned OWCP’s decision and determined that the claimant continued to be entitled to the 4 hours per day of wage-loss compensation, because she was unable to work for those four hours regardless of whether she had been removed or not.

RESIGNATIONS

• What if you resign employment?

It is rarely advisable to simply resign from federal employment. There are a variety of reasons for this including the impact it may have on your disability retirement, EEO and MSPB rights. Further, resigning places your health insurance in jeopardy as unless OWCP or OPM begin paying you, your group policy will expire. Every situation is different and you should always consult with an attorney that is knowledgeable about federal employment law before resigning your employment.

That said, with regard to your OWCP wage loss benefits, if you can prove through competent medical evidence that you were totally disabled prior to your resignation, or that you requested light duty and your agency notified you that none was available within your restrictions, you may continue to be entitled to wage-loss benefits even if you resign. At minimum, you should make sure that your SF-50 says that you are resigning for medical reasons.

• What if you were off of work on total disability, return to work in some capacity and then resign?

In this situation, unless you can show your level of disability increased since you returned, or your job duties changed in a significant way, OWCP may determine that you have abandoned suitable employment and invoke a penalty provision of the FECA which means you forfeit your entitlement to wage loss and a schedule award permanently. Obviously, you want to avoid that.

A better approach, in most cases, is to get a good medical report from your physician explaining why you cannot continue working at your current job duties. You then stop going into work and submit the medical report explaining why you cannot work that job at your agency. That gives the agency the opportunity to further modify your position to allow you to continue working, or tell you that no further accommodation is possible. In either case, you will not be stuck without an income as a result of resigning from what OWCP considers to be suitable employment.

• What if you are working full time, full duty and resign?

If you resign for reasons other than that competent medical evidence shows you are totally disabled from all work, then your wage-loss benefits will likely be terminated. The reason is that you were fully employed and capable of earning wages at the time of your resignation. Therefore, the reason you are not earning wages is because of your resignation and not because of your medical condition. OWCP only pays wage loss for inability to work – not for unwillingness to continue working.

• What if you are disabled from your position but not disabled from all work?

Many doctors will state your level of disability only as it relates to your full duty position. It may be clear to your doctor that you will never be able to return to working your regular job. It is important to understand that OWCP does not consider you totally disabled unless you are either unable to work at all in any capacity or you are unable to do your regular job and your agency has no light duty available. Therefore, if you are unable to work at your regular job you must still give your agency the opportunity to provide you with light duty. If you resign without providing your agency with that opportunity, OWCP may delay or refuse to pay you wage loss until your agency confirms that there was no light duty available.

If you apply for disability retirement, one of the questions your agency is asked is whether you can be accommodated. If they answer no, this may be enough to show that no light duty was available. However, because of different ways the term “accommodated” is interpreted by OWCP, OPM and EEOC, we still recommend that you ask separately, in writing, whether there is any light duty available for you before making any decision regarding your employment status.

Do not put yourself in the position where you have resigned and your agency notifies OWCP that is has light duty. Your agency does not have an obligation to take you back just because OWCP will not pay your wage loss.

CONCLUSION

As you can see from the examples above, getting terminated or resigning can have a major effect on your receipt of wage loss compensation from OWCP. Make sure to discuss your situation with someone who is experienced in handling OWCP cases before making any decisions. A misstep could very well cost you your entitlement to wage loss compensation and/or a schedule award.

——-
The above article was prepared by Daniel M. Goodkin, an associate attorney at the firm of Steven E. Brown, A Professional Law Corporation, Westlake Village, CA. Mr. Brown and his firm’s attorneys have more than 40 years of collective experience representing federal employees, with emphasis on wrongful termination, workers’ compensation, retirement issues and discrimination complaints. Mr. Brown has lectured before various groups on these and related topics for the past several years. The firm’s website, www.federal-law.com, contains materials developed for some of these talks, as well as other educational materials developed by attorney Brown as an aid to his clients and members of the public. The firm is located at 910 Hampshire Road, Suite G, Westlake Village, CA 91361, and can be reached at 805-496-9777 (voice), 805-496-6368 (fax), or sbrownesq@federal-law.com.

His employer had offered him a temporary light duty assignment which his doctors had stated was outside of his physical capabilities. OWCP made an informal determination that he could do the job and cut off his benefits.

The ECAB ruled that before terminating wage loss benefits, OWCP has to find the offered light duty position suitable. It must then give adequate notice to the claimant of its finding and give him an opportunity to respond. It did none of those things in this case.

Therefore, the Board overturned the Office’s decision stating, “[t]he Office did not follow proper procedures to determine that the modified job offered to appellant was suitable.” It further stated, “The notice and termination decision in this case appear as abberations to established Office procedures and the well-defined precedent of the Board.”

Download Decision

Postal Service employees faced with the Service’s downsizing moves, which include disabled employees having their hours reduced or being sent home from work under the National Reassessment Process (NRP), are understandably upset and worried by these developments.

The workshop was opened with an invocation and prayer by union vice-president Carol Sutton. Attorney Steven E. Brown of Westlake Village, California then made a lengthy presentation about employees’ rights, followed by a question-and-answer period in which he answered questions from individual employees and union officials.

After conclusion of the workshop, Ms. Sutton’s comments sent to Mr. Brown in a memo were: “The workshop was a huge success. The members and shop stewards remarked they all learned a lot. Thank you once again.”

QUICK SUMMARY OF POSTAL WORKERS RIGHTS TO WORKERS’ COMPENSATION AND DISABILITY RETIREMENT

Unlike many employees in the true private sector, Postal employees have very generous workers’ compensation and retirement options established long ago by Congress and the unions who represent these workers. These rights frequently come into play when Postal employees are sent home under the NRP.

Postal employees who have been injured on the job have benefits under the Federal Employees’ Compensation Act (FECA), which in 1916 established the workers’ compensation system for Postal and other civilian federal employees. This system is administered by the U. S. Department of Labor’s Office of Workers’ Compensation Programs (OWCP). The benefit for “temporary total disability” is either 66-2/3% (with no spouse or dependent) or 75% (with spouse or dependent) of the employee’s basic pay. Basic pay for this calculation includes night differential, holiday pay, and Sunday pay, but does not include overtime. Since FECA benefits are not taxable, for most employees this benefit is about the same amount as their regular pay check.

“Total disability” under this law does not mean that the employee is unable to do any work at all. It just means that he or she cannot perform the normal job duties or any other alternative duties that are offered by the Postal Service. Since the Postal Service is either not offering any work to these employees, or is drastically reducing their hours, such employees are entitled to workers’ compensation benefits to cover the hours lost. Under the workers’ compensation law, when an employee is working limited duty due to an accepted industrial injury and the employer reduces or eliminates work hours, that employee is by definition “totally disabled” for those hours/days and entitled to FECA benefits to cover the wage loss, except in the relatively rare circumstance in which OWCP has already made a formal decision about the particular employee’s permanent “loss of wage-earning capacity”.

Many people who deal with OWCP find that Office unhelpful or downright hostile to workers’ compensation claimants (employees), their doctors, and their representatives. In order to obtain full benefits available under the law, it may be necessary to hire competent legal counsel such as Mr. Brown’s office which has successfully represented many thousands of injured federal and Postal employees.

Assuming the disability is permanent – namely, it is expected to last for at least another year – the employee is also entitled to apply for early retirement under FERS or CSRS based on disability. Many of the notices that employees receive from the Postal Service about “no available work” do not even mention this option. Unlike workers’ compensation, disability retirement is designed as a permanent, lifetime benefit. If disability retirement is approved, the employee will be able to keep his or her federal group health and life insurance permanently, and pay the low federal group premiums. In addition, the employee is allowed to earn up to 80% of the current pay rate of his or her last Postal job and still receive the full pension benefit. This means that the total of pension benefits and non-Postal wages can often exceed current Postal pay.

Many deserving disability retirement applications are denied due to error by the U. S. Office of Personnel Management (OPM) and/or due to improper documentation, which can usually be remedied by competent legal counsel either informally or at the hearing stage. Mr. Brown’s office has successfully represented many hundreds of injured federal and Postal employees in disability retirement applications, including appeals to the Merit Systems Protection Board (MSPB) when OPM improperly denied the applications.

In both workers’ compensation claims and disability retirement applications, there ar e strict (and differing) requirements about the type of medical and other evidence that must be presented. Most doctors find it helpful when their patient is represented by knowledgeable legal counsel, who can advise them what they must write in an appropriate medical report.

A lthough Postal workers may feel that the Service’s decision to send them home is unjustified and may be motivated by disability discrimination, these employees should be aware that there are several class action complaints currently pending at EEOC under which they may already be covered.  If they are included in the class of Postal employees being represented by class counsel, they cannot “opt out” of that class action, and their rights with regard to disability discrimination will be determined in that case instead of in any individual EEO complaints they might file. Nevertheless, such employees should file their individual EEO complaints in order to protect any rights they have that might not fall under one of the class actions.

IF YOU NEED ASSISTANCE ABOUT ANY OF THESE MATTERS, PLEASE CALL US - 805-496-9777

Recently, we had an injured client come to us who previously did not apply for disability retirement based on some bad advice she had received. As she came to our firm over a year after the time she left her position at the Postal Service, she lost all her rights to disability retirement. Losing her disability retirement also complicated her workers’ compensation case, and it eventually lowered the amount she could collect under the Federal Employees’ Compensation Act (FECA) as well. If this client had known when the rights to claim her benefits would expire, she would have been a lot better off financially.

It is equally as important for a federal employee to find out when the rights to claim workers’ compensation benefits expire. Again, I find that often federal workers are not always informed by their employers of these important deadlines. An example of a deadline for workers’ compensation is that a written claim for compensation must normally be filed within three years after the date of a traumatic injury. For a dormant injury, the three years starts when the employee was aware or should have been aware that his or her injury is related to the employment. We have had many clients that have injuries that occurred years or decades earlier, but where no claim was filed. While it is not always impossible to get those claims approved, it certainly can make things more difficult and time consuming for the injured worker.

There are exceptions to these deadlines. For example, under FECA, if an official supervisor of the injured employee has actual knowledge of the injury within 30 days of its occurrence, then the limitations period in which to file a claim is extended. It would generally be better for a federal employee to still submit a timely written claim, since then they would not have to prove that their supervisor had actual knowledge. Another exception is if an injury incapacitates the employee mentally or physically so that a written notice and claim cannot be executed. There are other exceptions not listed here, and at any rate, it is far safer to submit a written form within these time periods if possible than to rely on an exception. Note that any words of claim are sufficient: as long as the employer is put on written notice that you were injured and you claim the injury is related to work, that is enough to extend the time limit for filing a formal claim with OWCP.

______________________________
The above article was prepared by Brett E. Blumstein, an associate attorney at the firm of Steven E. Brown, A Professional Law Corporation, Westlake Village, CA. Mr. Brown and his firm’s attorneys have more than 40 years of collective experience representing federal employees, with emphasis on wrongful termination, workers’ compensation, retirement issues and discrimination complaints. Mr. Brown has lectured before various groups on these and related topics for the past several years. The firm’s website, www.federal-law.com, contains materials developed for some of these talks, as well as other educational materials developed by attorney Brown as an aid to his clients and members of the public. The firm is located at 910 Hampshire Road, Suite G, Westlake Village, CA 91361, and can be reached at 805-496-9777 (voice), 805-496-6368 (fax), or sbrownesq@federal-law.com.