| Matter of Spellen (Commissioner of Labor) |
| 2024 NY Slip Op 06098 |
| Decided on December 5, 2024 |
| Appellate Division, Third Department |
| Published by New York State Law Reporting Bureau pursuant to Judiciary Law § 431. |
| This opinion is uncorrected and subject to revision before publication in the Official Reports. |
Joseph Spellen, Brooklyn, appellant pro se.
Letitia James, Attorney General, New York City (Camille J. Hart of counsel), for respondent.
Appeal from a decision of the Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board, filed September 5, 2023, which denied claimant's application for reopening and reconsideration of a prior decision.
By decision filed June 2, 2023, the Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board affirmed a decision finding claimant ineligible to receive unemployment insurance benefits because he did not return a questionnaire sent by the Department of Labor seeking pertinent information regarding his receipt of disability benefits and thus did not comply with registration requirements. By decision filed September 5, 2023, claimant's subsequent application for reopening and reconsideration, which was untimely and did not set forth an explanation for the delay, was denied. Claimant again requested reopening and reconsideration, which the Board also denied. Claimant appeals from the Board's September 2023 decision.[FN1]
We affirm. "A decision as to whether to grant an application to reopen a decision is within the sound discretion of the Board[,] and, absent a showing that it abused that discretion, its decision will not be disturbed" (Matter of Aiello [Commissioner of Labor], 227 AD3d 1256, 1257 [3d Dept 2024] [internal quotation marks and citations omitted]). Claimant raises no arguments regarding the denial of the application to reopen and/or reconsider the Board's prior decision, and our review of the record does not disclose any basis to disturb the Board's denial of claimant's application in this regard (see Matter of Paka [Same Day Delivery Inc.-Commissioner of Labor], 213 AD3d 1050, 1051 [3d Dept 2023]; Matter of Shaw [Commissioner of Labor], 197 AD3d 1451, 1451 [3d Dept 2021]). To the extent that he challenges the underlying merits of the Board's decision finding that he was ineligible to receive unemployment insurance benefits, such arguments are not properly before us (see Matter of Shaw [Commissioner of Labor], 197 AD3d at 1451-1452).
Garry, P.J., Clark, Pritzker, Fisher and Powers, JJ., concur.
ORDERED that the decision is affirmed, without costs.