Stevenson v. DOWCP
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
FRANKLIN D. STEVENSON, Petitioner, v. DIRECTOR, OFFICE OF WORKERS' COMPENSATION PROGRAMS; ISLAND CREEK COAL COMPANY, Respondents.
On Petition for Review of an Order of the Benefits Review Board. (06-0799-BLA)
March 31, 2008
April 17, 2008
Before TRAXLER, GREGORY, and SHEDD, Circuit Judges.
Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
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 & KELLY, PLLC, Morgantown, West Virginia, for Respondents.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM: 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' Comp. Programs, 889 "[T]he sixty day filing period
F.2d 1360, 1363 (4th Cir. 1989).
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
- 2 -
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
Why Is My Information Online?