Ricky L. Newsome v. Director, Office of Workers' Compensation Programs (Board decision, March 15, 2022)
Newsome v. Director (BRB 20-0138 BLA): en banc reconsideration denied
Apply this to your situation
This order from 2022 bound only the parties to this case; it isn't precedent. Ask about your situation and see what the current statutes and regulations the Board applies and Board precedent say, with citations.
BRB final decision. This unpublished order is not precedent. The Benefits Review Board denied a timely request for en banc reconsideration, leaving its earlier decision in place. Board finality is governed by 20 C.F.R. § 802.406; this order disposes of the reconsideration request filed under 20 C.F.R. § 802.407.
Plain-English summary
Counsel for Ricky Newsome requested en banc reconsideration of an earlier Board decision in his black lung case. The Director opposed the request. A majority of the Board did not vote to vacate or modify its earlier decision, so the Board denied reconsideration. The order does not restate the earlier decision's merits.
Decision snapshot
- Authority: En banc reconsideration under 20 C.F.R. §§ 801.301(c) and 802.409.
- Outcome: Motion for en banc reconsideration denied.
- Key point: Without a majority vote to change the earlier decision, that decision remains in place.
Full text (DOL BRB public release)
U.S. Department of Labor
Benefits Review Board
200 Constitution Ave. NW
Washington, DC 20210-0001
BRB No. 20-0138 BLA
RICKY L. NEWSOME
)
)
Claimant
)
)
v. ) DATE ISSUED: 3/15/2022
)
DIRECTOR, OFFICE OF WORKERS’
)
COMPENSATION PROGRAMS, UNITED
)
STATES DEPARTMENT OF LABOR
) ORDER on MOTION for
) RECONSIDERATION
Respondent
) EN BANC
Claimant’s counsel (Counsel) has filed a timely motion for reconsideration en banc of the Benefits Review Board’s decision in this case, Newsome v. Director, OWCP, BRB No. 20-0138 BLA (Feb. 25, 2021) (unpub.) (Buzzard, J., dissenting). 33 U.S.C.
§921(b)(5); 20 C.F.R. §802.407. The Director, Office of Workers’ Compensation
Programs, responds in opposition to Counsel’s motion.
After consideration of Counsel’s contentions, a majority of the Board has not voted to vacate or modify the Board’s decision. Therefore, Counsel’s motion for reconsideration en banc is denied. 20 C.F.R. §§801.301(c), 802.409.
By Order of the Board:
Thomas O. Shepherd, Jr.
Clerk of the Appellate Boards
What applies to your situation today?
This order bound one employer. Ezel checks the current statutes and regulations the Board applies and Board precedent against your facts, with citations.
Try Ezel Pro free for 7 days. Cancel anytime before the trial ends and you pay nothing.
- Checks the law as it stands today, not only this page
- Cites every source it relies on, so you can verify it
- Chat, drafting and research in one workspace