Sweeney v. Director

[NOT FOR PUBLICATION]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-