Hodgson v. Commissioner

Filing 920070222


Download PDF
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 06-1638 JOY L. HODGSON, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus COMMISSIONER, Barnhart, Social Security, Jo Anne B. Defendant - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of West Virginia, at Wheeling. Frederick P. Stamp, Jr., District Judge. (5:05-cv-00014-FPS) Submitted: February 9, 2007 Decided: February 22, 2007 Before WILKINSON, MOTZ, and GREGORY, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Timothy F. Cogan, CASSIDY, MYERS, COGAN & VOEGELIN, L.C., Wheeling, West Virginia, for Appellant. Donna L. Calvert, Regional Chief Counsel, Nora R. Koch, Supervisory Regional Counsel, Kathleen Hogan, Assistant Regional Counsel, SOCIAL SECURITY ADMINISTRATION, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania; Thomas E. Johnston, United States Attorney, Helen Campbell Altmeyer, Assistant United States Attorney, Wheeling, West Virginia, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM: Joy L. Hodgson appeals the district court's order adopting the report and recommendation of the magistrate judge affirming benefits. the Commissioner's denial of supplemental security We uphold the decision to deny benefits if the decision is supported by substantial evidence and the correct law was applied. 585, 589 See (4th 42 U.S.C. 405(g)(2000); Craig v. Chater, 76 F.3d Cir. 1996). and We the have thoroughly briefs reviewed and find the no administrative record parties' reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. See Hodgson v. Barnhart, No. 5:05-cv-00014-FPS (N.D. W. Va. Mar. 27, 2006). We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process. AFFIRMED - 2 -

Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.

Why Is My Information Online?