Download Original Microsoft Word Document




				
				
	 
JANISE GARLAND         			)	BRB No. 03-836      
             				)	OWCP No. 18-73216  
		Claimant-Respondent	)            				                  	           					)
	v. 		                )              
                                   	)	DATE ISSUED: October 29, 2003
NAVY PERSONNEL COMMAND/MWR		)
					)
		Employer-Petitioner	)
					)
CONTRACT CLAIMS SERVICES, INC.		)
                                   	)
       		Carrier-Respondent	)   
_____________________________________	)
					)
					)
JAMES GARLAND				)	BRB No. 03-838
					)	OWCP No. 18-73216
		Claimant-Respondent	)
					)
	v.				)
					)
NAVY PERSONNEL COMMAND/MWR		)
					)
		Employer-Petitioner	)
					)
	and				)
					)
CONTRACT CLAIMS SERVICES, INC.		)
					)
		Carrier-Respondent	)	ORDER


On September 19, 2003, the Board acknowledged employer's Notice of Appeal of the District Director's Compensation Order Awarding Attorney Fees, and assigned the appeal, BRB No. 03-836.

Thereafter, on September 22, 2003, the Board received a second notice of appeal of the district director's compensation order awarding attorney fees, from counsel for employer. The Board acknowledged this appeal on October 6, 2003, and assigned the appeal, BRB No. 03-838. 1

Inasmuch as this appeal was acknowledged in error the Board, therefore, deletes BRB No. 03-838, from its docket and transfers all documents filed in this case to BRB No. 03-836.

The Board has received employer's Petition for Review and brief in support of its appeal, BRB No. 03-836. 20 C.F.R. '802.211. Response briefs may be filed within thirty (30) days from receipt of this Order. 20 C.F.R. '802.212.

By Order of the Board:

________________________

Thomas O. Shepherd, Jr.

Clerk of the Board

ENDNOTES

1. The Board contacted counsel for employer via telephone with regards to the filing of employer's second notice of appeal. Rita Carroll, Esq., indicated that the second appeal was intended to be a duplicate of employer's initial appeal, BRB No. 03-836. Ms. Carroll indicated that the appeal erroneously identified the claimant as James Garland, rather than Janise Garland.



NOTE: This is a LHCA Unpublished Document


To Top of Document  | Return to LHCA Unpublished October 2003 Decisions Index