Lumas Guidry v. Waveland Services, Incorporated (Board decision, March 11, 2019)

BRB final decision. This unpublished decision is not precedent. A Board decision ordinarily becomes final 60 days after issuance unless a timely petition for judicial review or Board reconsideration is filed under 20 C.F.R. § 802.406. A party may request Board reconsideration within 30 days under 20 C.F.R. § 802.407.

Plain-English summary

Lumas Guidry asked the Board to reconsider its earlier decision in his case against Waveland Services. The Board found that he had not shown an error and that his arguments had been rejected previously. It denied reconsideration. The Board noted that Guidry would need to file a modification motion with the district director for new evidence to be considered.

Decision snapshot

• Authority: Board reconsideration under 20 C.F.R. §§ 802.407 and 802.409; modification under 33 U.S.C. § 922.
• Outcome: Claimant’s motion for reconsideration denied.
• Key point: New evidence belongs in a modification motion before the district director.

Full text (DOL BRB public release)

U.S. Department of Labor
Benefits Review Board
200 Constitution Ave. NW
Washington, DC 20210-0001

BRB No. 18-0483

LUMAS GUIDRY
)
)
Claimant-Petitioner
)
)
v. )
) DATE ISSUED: 03/11/2019
WAVELAND SERVICES,
)
INCORPORATED
)
)
and
)
)
SEABRIGHT INSURANCE COMPANY
)
)
Employer/Carrier-
) ORDER on MOTION for
Respondents
) RECONSIDERATION

Claimant has filed a timely Motion for Reconsideration of the Board’s Decision and Order in this case, Guidry v. Waveland Services, Inc., BRB No. 18-0483 (Dec. 13, 2018). 33 U.S.C. §921(b)(5); 20 C.F.R. §802.407. Employer responds, urging the Board to deny claimant’s motion. Because claimant has not established any error in the Board’s decision, and his arguments have been rejected previously, we deny claimant’s motion for reconsideration.1

1
Claimant, on his own behalf, has filed a pleading indicating he has new evidence.
In order to have this evidence considered, claimant must file a motion for modification with the district director. 33 U.S.C. §922; 20 C.F.R. §702.373.

Accordingly, claimant’s motion for reconsideration is denied. 20 C.F.R. §802.409.

SO ORDERED.

JUDITH S. BOGGS
Administrative Appeals Judge

GREG J. BUZZARD
Administrative Appeals Judge

RYAN GILLIGAN
Administrative Appeals Judge