IN THE COMMONWEALTH COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA Abdalla Amin, : Petitioner : : v. : : Unemployment Compensation : Board of Review, : No. 773 C.D. 2022 Respondent : Submitted: March 24, 2023 BEFORE: HONORABLE CHRISTINE FIZZANO CANNON, Judge HONORABLE ELLEN CEISLER, Judge HONORABLE LORI A. DUMAS, Judge OPINION NOT REPORTED MEMORANDUM OPINION BY JUDGE FIZZANO CANNON FILED: May 9, 2023 Petitioner, Abdalla Amin (Claimant), pro se, seeks review of an order of the Unemployment Compensation (UC) Board of Review (Board) dated June 28, 2022. The Board affirmed a referee’s decision dismissing Claimant’s appeal of two initial determinations by the Pennsylvania Department of Labor and Industry, Office of UC Benefits (Department) that denied UC benefits and found Claimant received non-fault overpayments of UC benefits. The referee concluded, and the Board affirmed, that Claimant’s appeal from the Department’s initial determinations was untimely under Section 501(e) of the UC Law,1 43 P.S. § 821(e). Upon review, we affirm the Board’s order. 1 Act of December 5, 1936, Second Ex. Sess., P.L. (1937) 2897, as amended, 43 P.S. § 821(e). On September 29, 2020, the Department mailed Claimant a notice of an initial determination denying UC benefits because Claimant failed to meet his burden to prove a valid work authorization issued by the United States Citizenship and Immigration Services. Certified Record (C.R.) at 21, 71, 80. The notice provided appeal instructions and stated Claimant had to appeal within 15 days, or by October 14, 2020. Id. at 36, 73, 80.2 On June 11, 2021, the Department sent Claimant a notice of an initial determination of a non-fault overpayment. Id. at 36, 71. Thirty-six days later, on July 27, 2021, Claimant appealed both initial determinations. Id. at 32, 35, 43, 80. In his appeal document, Claimant did not address the timeliness of his appeal; he merely alleged that he was not working during the periods for which he received UC benefits. Id. at 41. The Department issued a notice of a referee hearing concerning Claimant’s appeal. C.R. at 53. The notice listed the issues to be addressed at the hearing, specifically including whether Claimant filed a timely appeal from the initial determinations. Id. The referee held a telephone hearing on February 9, 2022. Id. at 53. At the hearing, Claimant acknowledged that he received the notices of determination. Id. at 73, 80. He stated he did not remember when he sent his appeal, but that he resent it on July 27, 2021. Id. at 74. However, the record contains no evidence of any earlier appeal. Id. at 80. On February 9, 2022, following the telephone hearing, the referee issued a decision dismissing Claimant’s appeal as untimely. C.R. at 79-82. Claimant timely appealed to the Board from the referee’s dismissal. Id. at 89-95. On June 28, 2022, the Board issued an order affirming the referee’s dismissal of Claimant’s appeal of the initial determinations. Id. at 106-08. Before the Board, 2 The appeal deadline was expanded from 15 to 21 days as of July 24, 2021. 2 …
Original document
Source: All recent Immigration Decisions In All the U.S. Courts of Appeals