Elawyers Elawyers
Washington| Change

92-1530 (1993)

Court: Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit Number: 92-1530 Visitors: 14
Filed: Jun. 11, 1993
Latest Update: Feb. 22, 2020
Summary: 995 F.2d 1062 NOTICE: Fourth Circuit I.O.P. 36.6 states that citation of unpublished dispositions is disfavored except for establishing res judicata, estoppel, or the law of the case and requires service of copies of cited unpublished dispositions of the Fourth Circuit. Buddy DOOLEY, Petitioner, v. B & B COAL COMPANY; Old Republic Insurance Company; Director, Office of Workers' Compensation Programs, United States Department of Labor, Respondents. No. 92-1530. United States Court of Appeals, Fou
More

995 F.2d 1062

NOTICE: Fourth Circuit I.O.P. 36.6 states that citation of unpublished dispositions is disfavored except for establishing res judicata, estoppel, or the law of the case and requires service of copies of cited unpublished dispositions of the Fourth Circuit.
Buddy DOOLEY, Petitioner,
v.
B & B COAL COMPANY; Old Republic Insurance Company;
Director, Office of Workers' Compensation
Programs, United States Department of
Labor, Respondents.

No. 92-1530.

United States Court of Appeals,
Fourth Circuit.

Submitted: February 1, 1993
Decided: June 11, 1993

On Petition for Review of an Order of the Benefits Review Board. (90-181-BLA)

Buddy Dooley, Petitioner Pro Se.

Mark Elliott Solomons, Laura Metcoff Klaus, Arter & Hadden, Washington, D.C.; Barbara J. Johnson, Matthew P. Levin, United States Department of Labor, Washington, D.C., for Respondents.

Ben.Rev.Bd.

DISMISSED.

Before HALL and PHILLIPS, Circuit Judges, and BUTZNER, Senior Circuit Judge.

PER CURIAM:

1

Buddy Dooley submitted his Petition for Review of the denial of his request for black lung benefits to the Benefits Review Board within the applicable sixty-day appeal period, 33 U.S.C. § 921(c) (1988), incorporated by reference into 30 U.S.C. § 932(a) (1988), but notice was not forwarded to this Court until after the appeal period had expired. Consequently, this Court is without jurisdiction to hear this petition. Adkins v. Director, Office of Workers Compensation Programs, 889 F.2d 1360, 1361 (4th Cir. 1989). We therefore grant the Respondent's Motion to 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

*

We note that our dismissal of Dooley's Petition for Review does not prejudice his right to file a new claim if the deputy commissioner finds a "material change in conditions." 20 C.F.R.s 725.309(d) (1992)

Source:  CourtListener

Can't find what you're looking for?

Post a free question on our public forum.
Ask a Question
Search for lawyers by practice areas.
Find a Lawyer