Maza v. SHHS

Opinion

USCA1 Opinion

March 21, 1994        [NOT FOR PUBLICATION]

                            UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
                                FOR THE FIRST CIRCUIT
                                 ___________________

No. 93-1627

AMERICA MAZA,

                                Plaintiff, Appellant,

                                          v.

                   SECRETARY OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES, ET AL.,

                                Defendants, Appellees.

__________________

                     APPEAL FROM THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

                          FOR THE DISTRICT OF MASSACHUSETTS

                     [Hon. Robert E. Keeton, U.S. District Judge]
                                             ___________________

                                 ___________________

                                        Before

                                 Breyer, Chief Judge,
                                         ___________
                         Torruella and Selya, Circuit Judges.
                                              ______________

                                 ___________________

               America Maza on brief pro se.
               ____________

__________________

                                  __________________

Per  Curiam.        We  affirm  the   dismissal  of
                      ___________

            appellant's  pro se complaint  substantially for  the reasons
                         ___ __

            stated in the district court's  memorandum and order of April

            26, 1993.  Appellant's claims against the Secretary of Health

            and Human Services  are time-barred under 42  U.S.C.   405(g)

            and  the  applicable regulations.    20  C.F.R.     416.1455,

            .1481.  See also    416.1405, .1421.  There is no  indication
                    ___ ____

            that  the Secretary found that good reasons exist to allow an

            extention of time  for a  late filing for  judicial review.  

            See    416.1482, .1411.  Otherwise, the complaint suggests no
            ___

            cognizable federal cause of action.

                      Affirmed.
                      _________

-3-