Key legal question
Whether the appeal met the admissibility requirements of Art. 42 LTF and Art. 108 LTF
Extracted holding
The appeal was inadmissible because it contained no conclusions and did not explain why the challenged judgment violated federal law or was based on manifestly incorrect fact-finding.
Extracted reasoning
The appellant failed to present a targeted argument addressing the reasoning of the Federal Administrative Court, as required by Art. 42(1)-(2) LTF; therefore simplified non-entry under Art. 108(1)(b) LTF was warranted.