FRANK, Circuit Judge.
We agree with the district judge. That the applicant called the paper he filed a "claim for compensation" instead of an "application" for review is of no moment. The application asking such relief was filed within the year referred to in § 22. Candado does not contend that it received no notice of the filing as required by § 19, which governs the procedure with respect to § 22 applications. The twenty-day provision in the last sentence of § 19(c) we regard as neither mandatory nor jurisdictional. Consequently, we think that the deputy's jurisdiction did not terminate merely because he did not act within the twenty days.
33 U.S.C.A. § 922.
33 U.S.C.A. § 919.
The running of the one-year period of limitation was stopped by the filing of the application. It would be absurd to say — indeed Candado does not say — that the order must be made within the year. Candado does argue that jurisdiction vanishes unless the deputy commences a hearing within that time. We cannot agree. For otherwise an application filed on the last day of the year, or even earlier but at a time when the docket was crowded, would be a nullity. Any delay prejudicial to Candado could have been avoided by it, had it asked for a more prompt hearing. Not having done so, it is in no position to complain on jurisdictional or other grounds.
Affirmed.