D. Ciccolini v. UCBR, D. Ciccolini v. UCBR

Domenic Ciccolini filed for Pennsylvania unemployment compensation (UC) in June 2015 and received the UC handbook instructing that biweekly claims must be filed during the week immediately following the two-week period claimed.
Ciccolini’s claim became inactive after failing to file in July 2015; he reopened it several times in 2016 (Feb. 28, Mar. 29, Apr. 26).
For the biweekly periods ending March 5, April 2, and April 30, 2016, Ciccolini attempted to file claims before the relevant weeks had ended (on the first day of each claim week) and testified he did not know claims must be filed after the week ends.
The Department denied his requests to backdate (extend) filing for those weeks under Section 401(c) and 34 Pa. Code §65.43a, concluding he did not timely attempt to file and his errors were negligent, not the result of Department error or other listed exceptions.
The Unemployment Compensation Board of Review affirmed; the Commonwealth Court reviewed whether the Board’s factual findings were supported by substantial evidence and whether the Board properly applied the regulation limiting backdating to specified reasons.

Issue	Ciccolini's Argument	Board/Department's Argument	Held
Whether claimant is entitled to extended/backdated filing for three biweekly weeks despite filing attempts occurring before the claimed weeks ended	Ciccolini says he made reasonable, good-faith efforts to file during the correct weeks but was prevented by system errors and Department misdirection, so he should be allowed backdating	Board says claimant attempted to file too early (before weeks ended), failed to follow handbook instructions, and his negligence (not Department error) disqualifies him from extension under §65.43a	Affirmed: claimant’s own testimony supports Board finding he filed too soon and negligence in not following clear handbook instructions does not justify extension under §65.43a

Holt v. Unemployment Comp. Bd. of Review, 840 A.2d 1071 (discusses substantial-evidence support for Board findings)
Ductmate Indus., Inc. v. Unemployment Comp. Bd. of Review, 949 A.2d 338 (preference for Board factfinding and reasonable inferences)
Peak v. Unemployment Comp. Bd. of Review, 501 A.2d 1383 (Board findings on credibility are binding on appeal)
Mitcheltree v. Unemployment Comp. Bd. of Review, 635 A.2d 701 (limits on backdating claims and §65.43(a) filing requirements)
Menalis v. Unemployment Comp. Bd. of Review, 712 A.2d 804 (claimant ineligible for untimely filing absent misleading by UC authorities)