Summary Calendar BEVERLY A. GOSHN, JUDY G. COX MOSESMAN v. Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation, as successor to the FEDERAL SAVINGS & LOAN…

*Local Rule 47.5 provides: "The publication of opinions
that have no precedential value and merely decide particular
cases on the basis of well-settled principles of law imposes
needless expense on the public and burdens on the legal
profession." Pursuant to that Rule, the court has determined
that this opinion should not be published.
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT
_____________________
No. 93-1015
Summary Calendar
_____________________
BEVERLY A. GOSHN,
JUDY G. COX MOSESMAN, Plaintiffs-Appellants,
v.
FEDERAL DEPOSIT INSURANCE CORPORATION, as successor to the
FEDERAL SAVINGS & LOAN INSURANCE CORPORATION and as Manager
of the FEDERAL SAVINGS & LOAN INSURANCE CORPORATION
RESOLUTION FUND and as Receiver for VERNON SAVINGS AND LOAN
ASSOCIATION, FSA, ET AL.,Defendants,
FEDERAL DEPOSIT INSURANCE CORPORATION, Etc.,
Defendant-Appellee.
_________________________________________________________________
On Petition for Review of a Final Determination of the
Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation
7:90 CV 026 K
_________________________________________________________________
August 26, 1993
Before KING, DAVIS and WEINER, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:*
Petitioners Beverly A. Goshn and Judy G. Cox Mosesman seek
review of a final deposit insurance determination made by the
Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC), pursuant to 12
U.S.C. § 1821(f)(4). We dismiss the petition for review.

-- 1 of 3 --

2
On January 18, 1990, the FDIC issued a final determination
letter denying petitioners' request for separate insurance
coverage for two deposit accounts in the Vernon Savings and Loan
Association, FSA. Petitioners filed this action for review of
that determination in the United States District Court for the
Northern District of Texas on April 12, 1990. Petitioners later
amended their complaint to include alleged claims under the
Federal Tort Claims Act (FTCA). Shortly before trial on both the
requested review of the FDIC's final determination and the claims
under the FTCA, the district court severed the two matters and
transferred the deposit insurance claim to this court, pursuant
to 12 U.S.C. § 1821(f)(4).
This court has determined that the plain language of
subsection 1821(f)(4) provides for review of final administrative
decisions denying federal deposit insurance by the courts of
appeals, not the district courts. See Nimon v. Resolution Trust
Corp., 975 F.2d 240, 244 (5th Cir. 1992). Thus, the district
court properly transferred petitioners' request for review to
this court.
However, the plain language of subsection 1821(f)(5)
(entitled "Statute of limitations") provides that any request for
review of a final insurance determination must be filed with the
appropriate court of appeals no later than 60 days after such
determination is ordered. Because this court has already
recognized that the plain language of subsection 1821(f)(4) gives
the courts of appeals jurisdiction to review final insurance

-- 2 of 3 --

3
determinations, it follows that the plain language of subsection
1821(f)(5), which prescribes a 60-day statute of limitations,
must also apply.
Because petitioners' request for review was filed in the
district court 84 days after the FDIC's final insurance
determination, petitioners' request for review was not timely
filed. We therefore DISMISS the petition for review.

-- 3 of 3 --