From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Stevenson v. Dir. Office Workers

United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit
Apr 17, 2008
274 F. App'x 250 (4th Cir. 2008)

Opinion

No. 07-1803.

Submitted: March 31, 2008.

Decided: April 17, 2008.

On Petition for Review of an Order of the Benefits Review Board. (06-0799-BLA).

Franklin D. Stevenson, Petitioner Pro Se. Patricia May Nece, United States Department of Labor, Washington, D.C.; Mary Rich Maloy, Douglas Allan Smoot, Jackson Kelly, PLLC, Charleston, West Virginia; Kathy Lynn Snyder, Jackson West, PLLC, Morgantown, West Virginia, for Respondents.

Before TRAXLER, GREGORY, and SHEDD, Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.


Franklin D. Stevenson seeks to appeal the Benefits Review Board's order affirming the Administrative Law Judge's decision and order on remand denying Stevenson's application for black lung benefits. We dismiss the appeal for lack of jurisdiction because the petition for review was not timely filed.

In a black lung benefits case, a party seeking review of a decision and order issued by the Board must file a petition for review in the court of appeals within sixty days after the order is issued. 33 U.S.C. § 921(c) (2000). The sixty-day period for seeking review is jurisdictional, and a petition for review must be filed with the clerk of this court to stop the running of this period. Adkins v. Dir., Office of Workers' Camp. Programs, 889 F.2d 1360, 1363 (4th Cir. 1989). "[T]he sixty day filing period begins to run with the filing of a Board opinion with the Clerk of the Board." Mining Energy, Inc. v. Dir., Office of Workers' Comp. Programs, 391 F.3d 571, 575-76 (4th Cir. 2004).

In this case, the Board's decision was issued and served on the parties on June 15, 2007. Stevenson's petition for review was not filed until August 17, 2007, three days after the appeal period expired. We therefore dismiss the appeal. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

DISMISSED.


Summaries of

Stevenson v. Dir. Office Workers

United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit
Apr 17, 2008
274 F. App'x 250 (4th Cir. 2008)
Case details for

Stevenson v. Dir. Office Workers

Case Details

Full title:Franklin D. STEVENSON, Petitioner, v. DIRECTOR, OFFICE OF WORKERS…

Court:United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit

Date published: Apr 17, 2008

Citations

274 F. App'x 250 (4th Cir. 2008)