IAF, Tab 1. Apparently, the appellant stated in his letter to the Clerk, which is not in the record, that he was awaiting a response to an appeal that he submitted to the Clerk of the Board in December 1999. The Clerk informed him that it had no record of such a filing and advised him of the procedures for filing an appeal with the Board, including the appropriate field office. The record below contains no other information regarding his alleged December 1999 appeal. The Board has held that evidence that a pleading was sealed, properly addressed to the Board with postage prepaid, and placed in the Postal Service mail stream, gives rise to a presumption that it was filed on the date it was placed in the Postal Service mail stream, regardless of whether the Board receives it.
Direct evidence is required to invoke the presumption of delivery and receipt.
Direct evidence may be in the form of a document or testimony. The party invoking the presumption must present specific details concerning the mailing, such as the time of day and place of mailing. Furthermore, if an appellant can establish a factual dispute as to whether he timely filed his appeal and he requested a hearing, he is entitled to a timeliness hearing. Meyer v . The appellant asserts, with more than a bare allegation, that he did.