Sweeney v. Director

• Court: Court of Appeals for the First Circuit
• Decided: September 9, 1997
• Docket: 96-2161
• Status: Unpublished

Opinion

[NOT FOR PUBLICATION]

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIRST CIRCUIT

No. 96-2161

GLADYS SWEENEY,

Petitioner,

v.

DIRECTOR, OFFICE OF WORKERS' COMPENSATION PROGRAMS, UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF LABOR,

Respondent.

ON PETITION FOR REVIEW FROM BENEFITS REVIEW BOARD

Before

Torruella, Chief Judge, Boudin and Stahl, Circuit Judges.

Marcia J. Cleveland on brief for petitioner. Richard F. van Antwerp, Thomas R. Kelly and Robinson, Kriger, McCallum on brief for respondent Bath Iron Works Corporation. Stephen Hessert , Elizabeth M. Brogan and Norman, Hanson & DeTroy on brief for respondents, Bath Iron Works Corporation and Commercial Union Insurance Company. Nelson J. Larkins and Preti, Flaherty, Beliveau & Pachios , on brief for respondents Bath Iron Works Corporation and Birmingham Fire Insurance Company.

August 22, 1997

Per Curiam . Upon careful review of the briefs and record,

we conclude that the administrative law judge correctly

determined that during the relevant period petitioner was not

engaged in "maritime employment" covered under the Longshore

and Harbor Workers' Compensation Act, 33 U.S.C. S 902(3). That

determination is not undermined by the fact that petitioner

cleaned offices occupied by persons who may have been engaged

in "maritime employment" covered under the Act. Petitioner's

own duties did not have the requisite maritime characteristics.

See Graziano v. General Dynamics Corp. , 663 F.2d 340, 343 (1st

Cir. 1981); Dravo Corp. v. Banks, 567 F.2d 593, 595 (3rd Cir.

1977).

Petitioner's additional arguments regarding her former

status and gender bias are meritless.

Affirmed. See 1st Cir. Loc. R. 27.1.

-2-