Richards v. Social Security Comm

Filing 920071010

Opinion

Download PDF
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 07-1267 THOMAS H. RICHARDS, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus SOCIAL SECURITY COMMISSION, Defendant - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of West Virginia, at Martinsburg. Irene M. Keeley, Chief District Judge. (3:05-cv-00084-IMK) Submitted: September 24, 2007 Decided: October 10, 2007 Before WILKINSON, MOTZ, and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Regina L. Carpenter, MCLAUGHLIN & CARPENTER, Fairmont, West Virginia, for Appellant. Michael McGaughran, Regional Chief Counsel, Dina White Griffin, Special Assistant United States Attorney, William B. Reeser, Supervisory Attorney, SOCIAL SECURITY ADMINISTRATION, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania; Thomas E. Johnston, United States Attorney, Helen Campbell Altmeyer, Assistant United Sates Attorney, Wheeling, West Virginia, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM: Thomas H. Richards appeals the district court's order accepting the magistrate judge's recommendation to affirm the Commissioner's denial of disability insurance benefits. We must uphold the decision to deny benefits if the decision is supported by substantial evidence and the correct law was applied. See 42 U.S.C. 405(g) (2000); Craig v. Chater, 76 F.3d 585, 589 (4th Cir. 1996). We have thoroughly reviewed the administrative record and Accordingly, we the parties' briefs and find no reversible error. affirm. See Richards v. Soc. Sec. Comm'n, No. 3:05-cv-00084-IMK (N.D.W. Va. Jan. 19, 2007). 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?