USCA11 Case: 24-10805 Document: 49-1 Date Filed: 05/20/2025 Page: 1 of 3

[DO NOT PUBLISH] In the United States Court of Appeals For the Eleventh Circuit ____________________ No. 24-10805 Non-Argument Calendar ____________________ JEWELL CHAPPELL, Petitioner, versus UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF LABOR, BENEFITS REVIEW BOARD, DRUMMOND COMPANY, INC.,

Respondents.

____________________ Petition for Review of a Decision of the Benefits Review Board USCA11 Case: 24-10805 Document: 49-1 Date Filed: 05/20/2025 Page: 2 of 3

2 Opinion of the Court 24-10805 Agency No. BRB2021-05792 ____________________ Before ROSENBAUM, BRASHER, and ABUDU, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM: Jewell Chappell, on behalf of her deceased husband Edward Chappell, seeks review of a decision of the Benefits Review Board (the “Board”) entered on January 11, 2024. That decision denied Jewell Chappell’s motion for reconsideration of an earlier order of the Board.

The statutory time limit required Jewell Chappell to file a petition for review of the Board’s order on or before March 11, 2024, which was 60 days after the Board entered its order on Janu- ary 11, 2024. See 33 U.S.C. § 921(c); 20 C.F.R. § 725.482(a). How- ever, Jewell Chappell’s notice of appeal that initiated this proceed- ing was not filed until March 18, 2024, the date that we received it.

See Fed. R. App. P. 25(a)(2)(A)(i) (providing that a filing sent to us by mail is untimely unless the clerk receives it within the time fixed for filing); Rich v. Dir., Office of Workers’ Comp. Programs, 798 F.2d 432, 433 (11th Cir. 1986) (concluding that a petition for review un- der the Black Lung Benefits Act was deemed filed on the date that we received it, not the date that it was mailed). Because the 60-day time limit to petition for review of an order of the Board is jurisdic- tional, we lack jurisdiction over this appeal. See Sloan v. Drummond Co., Inc., 102 F.4th 1169, 1174-76 (11th Cir. 2024) (holding that 33 U.S.C. § 921(c)’s 60-day deadline is jurisdictional).

USCA11 Case: 24-10805 Document: 49-1 Date Filed: 05/20/2025 Page: 3 of 3

24-10805 Opinion of the Court 3 Accordingly, this appeal is DISMISSED, sua sponte, for lack of jurisdiction. No petition for rehearing may be filed unless it complies with the timing and other requirements of 11th Cir. R. 40-3 and all other applicable rules.