Paramont Coal Company v. DOWCP
Filing
UNPUBLISHED PER CURIAM OPINION filed. Originating case number: 12-0104 BLA Copies to all parties and the district court/agency. [999330208].. [13-1114]
Appeal: 13-1114
Doc: 34
Filed: 04/04/2014
Pg: 1 of 11
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 13-1114
PARAMONT COAL COMPANY OF VIRGINIA, LCC,
Petitioner,
v.
DIRECTOR, OFFICE OF WORKERS’ COMPENSATION PROGRAMS, UNITED
STATES DEPARTMENT OF LABOR; JEFFREY J. COLEMAN,
Respondents.
On Petition for Review of an Order of the Benefits Review Board.
(12-0104 BLA)
Submitted:
January 14, 2014
Decided:
April 4, 2014
Before TRAXLER, Chief Judge, and AGEE and FLOYD, Circuit Judges.
Petition denied by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Timothy W. Gresham, PENN, STUART & ESKRIDGE, Abingdon, Virginia,
for Petitioner.
Joseph E. Wolfe, Ryan C. Gilligan, WOLFE,
WILLIAMS,
RUTHERFORD
&
REYNOLDS,
Norton,
Virginia,
for
Respondent Jeffrey J. Coleman.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
Appeal: 13-1114
Doc: 34
Filed: 04/04/2014
Pg: 2 of 11
PER CURIAM:
Paramont Coal Company (“Paramont”) petitions for review of
the order of the Benefits Review Board (“Board”) affirming the
Administrative Law Judge’s (“ALJ”) award of benefits to Jeffrey
Coleman
(“Coleman”),
a
former
coal
mine
employee,
under
the
Black Lung Benefits Act of 1977 (the “Act”), 30 U.S.C. §§ 901 et
seq.
Paramont argues that the ALJ’s decision was contrary to
law and unsupported by substantial evidence.
For the reasons
that follow, we deny Paramont’s petition for review and affirm
the award of benefits to Coleman.
I.
Coleman
has
mining. 1
coal
spent
On
July
approximately
9,
2009,
33.34
Coleman
years
filed
employed
a
claim
in
for
benefits under the Act, which grants benefits to former miners
afflicted
with
pneumoconiosis,
commonly
disease. 2
See 20 C.F.R. § 718.201.
known
as
black
lung
Benefits under the Act are
awardable to miners who are totally disabled within the meaning
1
At the time he filed his application for benefits, Coleman
was still working for Paramont.
Unchallenged on appeal, the
ALJ’s finding regarding Coleman’s length of coal mine employment
was affirmed by the Board.
2
Coleman had filed a previous claim for benefits, which was
denied on February 12, 1999.
He did not further pursue that
claim.
2
Appeal: 13-1114
Doc: 34
Filed: 04/04/2014
Pg: 3 of 11
of the Act due to pneumoconiosis, or to the survivors of miners
who
were
totally
disabled
at
the
time
of
their
deaths
(for
claims filed prior to January 1, 1982), or to the survivors of
miners
whose
deaths
were
U.S.C. §§ 901 et seq.
Coal
Mine
Workers’
caused
by
pneumoconiosis.
See
30
The District Director of the Division of
Compensation
of
the
Office
of
Workers’
Compensation Programs (“District Director”) awarded benefits to
Coleman
on
August
3,
2010.
Upon
Paramont’s
request
for
a
hearing, the file was transferred to an ALJ for a formal hearing
to determine whether Coleman was eligible for benefits.
A hearing was held on June 11, 2011, in Abingdon, Virginia.
In order to prove eligibility under the Act, Coleman had to show
that he was totally disabled because of pneumoconiosis caused by
his
coal-mining
employment.
See
C.F.R. §§ 718.202–204, 725.202.
30
U.S.C.
§§
901,
921;
20
Because more than one year had
passed since the denial of his first claim, Coleman also had to
establish that “one of the applicable conditions of entitlement
. . . ha[d] changed since the date upon which the order denying
the prior claim became final.”
provides
an
irrebuttable
20 C.F.R. § 725.309(c).
statutory
presumption
of
The Act
total
disability resulting from pneumoconiosis where the coal miner
suffers from “a chronic dust disease of the lung.”
921(c)(3); 20 C.F.R. § 718.304.
3
30 U.S.C. §
Appeal: 13-1114
Doc: 34
Filed: 04/04/2014
Pg: 4 of 11
After reviewing the medical evidence at the hearing, the
ALJ determined that complicated pneumoconiosis arising out of
Coleman’s coal mine employment was established pursuant to 20
C.F.R. §§ 718.304 and 718.203(b), and found that he was entitled
to
invocation
of
the
irrebuttable
statutory
presumption
of
totally disabling pneumoconiosis under § 411(c)(3) of the Act,
30
U.S.C.
§
921(c)(3).
The
ALJ
therefore
determined
that
Coleman was entitled to benefits under the Act.
Paramont appealed to the Board, which affirmed the ALJ’s
decision and order awarding benefits.
Paramont timely appealed
the Board’s decision, and we have jurisdiction pursuant to 33
U.S.C. § 921(c), as incorporated by 30 U.S.C. § 932(a).
II.
In reviewing a claim for benefits under the Act, our review
of the Board’s order is “limited.”
Harman Mining Co. v. Dir.,
OWCP, 678 F.3d 305, 310 (4th Cir. 2012).
“to
assess
whether
substantial
We review the decision
evidence
supports
the
factual
findings of the ALJ and whether the legal conclusions of the
[Board]
law.”
and
Id.
ALJ
are
rational
and
consistent
with
applicable
Because the ALJ is the trier of fact, we “defer to
the ALJ’s evaluation of the proper weight to accord conflicting
medical opinions.”
supports
the
ALJ’s
Id.
Thus, as long as substantial evidence
findings,
we
4
“must
sustain
the
ALJ’s
Appeal: 13-1114
Doc: 34
decision,
even
Filed: 04/04/2014
if
[we]
questions of law de novo.
Pg: 5 of 11
disagree
with
it.”
Id.
We
review
Id.
III.
On
appeal,
although
Paramont
purports
to
raise
several
issues, it basically contends that the ALJ erred in finding the
existence of complicated pneumoconiosis established pursuant to
20
C.F.R.
§ 718.304
and,
therefore,
erred
in
finding
that
Coleman was entitled to the irrebuttable statutory presumption
of
totally
disabling
pneumoconiosis.
Paramont
specifically
contends that the ALJ’s analysis is legally flawed, and also
raises
a
broad
challenge
to
the
ALJ’s
weighing
of
the
conflicting evidence.
Section 411(c)(3) of the Act, as implemented by 20 C.F.R.
§ 718.304,
provides
an
irrebuttable
presumption
of
total
disability due to pneumoconiosis if the miner suffers from
a chronic dust disease of the lung which (A)
when diagnosed by chest [x-ray], yields one
or more large opacities (greater than one
centimeter in diameter) . . ., (B) when
diagnosed by biopsy or autopsy, yields
massive lesions in the lung, or (C) when
diagnosis is made by other means, would be a
condition which could reasonably be expected
to yield results described in clause (A) or
(B) if diagnosis had been made in the manner
prescribed in clause (A) or (B).
30 U.S.C. § 921(c)(3); 20 C.F.R. § 718.304.
The introduction of
legally sufficient evidence of complicated pneumoconiosis does
5
Appeal: 13-1114
Doc: 34
not,
Filed: 04/04/2014
however,
Pg: 6 of 11
automatically
irrebuttable presumption.
qualify
a
claimant
for
the
Rather, the evidence must establish
that the claimant has a “chronic dust disease of the lung,”
commonly known as complicated pneumoconiosis.
determination,
the
ALJ
must
examine
all
To make such a
the
evidence
on
the
issue, i.e., evidence of simple and complicated pneumoconiosis,
as well as evidence that pneumoconiosis is not present, resolve
any conflict in the evidence, and make findings of fact.
See E.
Assoc. Coal Corp. v. Dir., OWCP, 220 F.3d 250, 256–59 (4th Cir.
2000).
Our review of the record discloses that the ALJ’s decision
is
in
accordance
evidence.
with
the
law
and
supported
by
substantial
Pursuant to 20 C.F.R. § 718.304(a), the ALJ found
that the newly submitted x-ray of September 16, 2009 was read by
Dr. Michael S. Alexander (“Dr. Alexander”) and Dr. Kathleen A.
DePonte
(“Dr.
radiologists
DePonte”),
and
B
dually-qualified
readers,
as
positive
Board-certified
for
both
simple
pneumoconiosis and complicated pneumoconiosis, Category A.
The
ALJ noted that the x-ray was read as negative for pneumoconiosis
by
Dr.
Jerome
radiologist.
F.
Wiot
(“Dr.
Wiot”),
an
equally-qualified
However, the ALJ found that while Dr. William W.
Scott (“Dr. Scott”), an equally-qualified radiologist, read the
same
x-ray
as
negative
for
both
6
simple
pneumoconiosis
and
Appeal: 13-1114
Doc: 34
Filed: 04/04/2014
Pg: 7 of 11
complicated pneumoconiosis, he advised that a follow-up review
of the enlarging mass in the upper-right lung be conducted.
Regarding another submitted x-ray of December 7, 2009, the
ALJ found that Dr. DePonte read the x-ray as positive for both
simple pneumoconiosis and complicated pneumoconiosis, Category
A, while Dr. Wiot read the x-ray as negative.
The ALJ further
concluded
attributed
complicated
that
Drs.
Alexander
pneumoconiosis
to
and
coal
DePonte
mine
employment
and
the
that
there was no credible medical evidence of record indicating that
“the large masses in [Coleman’s] lungs are due to a process
other
than
pneumoconiosis.”
§ 718.304(a).
(J.A.
273);
see
also
20
C.F.R.
Consequently, the ALJ found that the existence of
complicated pneumoconiosis was established pursuant to § 718.304
overall.
The ALJ also weighed the new evidence with the evidence
from Coleman’s prior 1999 claim, including x-rays and a medical
opinion.
After
crediting
the
more
recent
evidence,
the
ALJ
determined that the existence of complicated pneumoconiosis was
established pursuant to § 718.304 overall.
The ALJ concluded,
therefore,
to
invocation
of
totally
§ 411(c)(3)
that
Coleman
irrebuttable
was
entitled
presumption
of
the
disabling
pneumoconiosis.
Paramont contends that the ALJ erred in finding that the xray evidence established complicated pneumoconiosis on the basis
7
Appeal: 13-1114
of
Doc: 34
the
Filed: 04/04/2014
Category
A
Pg: 8 of 11
classifications
of
Dr.
Alexander
and
Dr.
DePonte, without considering the fact that other x-ray readings
did not identify Category A opacities.
Additionally, Paramont
contends that the ALJ erred in rejecting evidence that showed
that the large mass seen on the x-ray evidence was not due to
complicated
pneumoconiosis,
but
was
due
to
another
disease
process.
Contrary to Paramont’s arguments, however, the ALJ properly
found complicated pneumoconiosis pursuant to § 718.304(a), based
on
the
x-ray
classified
readings
the
of
opacities
Drs.
seen
Alexander
as
and
Category
DePonte,
A.
The
who
ALJ
permissibly found that the other x-ray readings, 3 which either
did
not
diagnose
a
large
opacity,
identify
the
size
of
the
opacities seen, or address the existence of the large opacity
observed by Drs. Alexander and DePonte, were insufficient to
overcome the Category A classifications of Drs. Alexander and
DePonte.
See E. Assoc. Coal Corp., 220 F.3d at 256; Piney
Mountain Coal Co. v. Mays, 176 F.3d 753, 756 (4th Cir. 1999).
3
These readings consisted of the readings of the September
16, 2009 and December 7, 2009 x-rays and the readings of other
x-rays that were deemed to be of less than optimal quality; that
identified nodules but did not refer to their size or cause;
that identified a large mass that might be Category A; and that
were classified for pneumoconiosis as either 0/1 or 1/1.
8
Appeal: 13-1114
Doc: 34
Moreover,
Filed: 04/04/2014
the
ALJ
Pg: 9 of 11
properly
found
that
the
evidence
established that the large masses seen on the x-rays were due to
complicated
pneumoconiosis
and
not
another
disease
process.
Specifically, the ALJ permissibly rejected the opinions of Dr.
James R. Castle (“Dr. Castle”) and Dr. Gregory J. Fino (“Dr.
Fino”), who suggested a possible link between the large opacity
seen on x-ray and sarcoidosis or healed granulomatous disease,
as equivocal. 4
The ALJ, therefore, found that the opinions of
Drs. Castle and Fino were insufficient to establish that the
large opacities were not due to coal mine employment and, as to
the “possible” cause of the large opacity, were not credible as
they were unsupported by any evidence in the record.
274.)
Drs.
(J.A.
In contrast, the ALJ properly credited the findings of
Alexander
and
DePonte,
attributing
Coleman’s
Category
A
opacity to coal mine employment, as the ALJ found that their
findings were supported by the evidence in the record.
The ALJ
thus properly found that Coleman had established the existence
of
complicated
pneumoconiosis
4
arising
out
of
coal
mine
Dr. Castle opined that laboratory testing conducted on
Coleman, while negative for histoplasmosis, “suggested” possible
sarcoidosis and the few non-specific nodules seen on Coleman’s
x-rays were “most likely” due to an infectious disease that had
healed. (J.A. 274.) Dr. Fino opined that Coleman’s x-rays did
not show complicated pneumoconiosis and that the Category A
opacities
seen
by
other
physicians
“could”
be
due
to
sarcoidosis. (J.A. 274.)
9
Appeal: 13-1114
Doc: 34
Filed: 04/04/2014
Pg: 10 of 11
employment pursuant to 20 C.F.R. § 718.304, and accordingly, was
entitled
to
invocation
of
the
§
411(c)(3)
irrebuttable
presumption of totally disabling pneumoconiosis.
Ultimately,
we
conclude
that
the
record
compels
uphold the award of black lung benefits in this case.
Paramont
repeatedly
opinions
of
Drs.
contends
Alexander
that
and
the
ALJ’s
DePonte,
reliance
over
those
us
to
Although
on
of
the
Drs.
Castle and Fino, constitutes reversible error, the record here
contains
conflicting
medical
opinions
as
suffers from complicated pneumoconiosis.
to
whether
The ALJ’s role, as
fact-finder, was to resolve such conflicts.
F.3d
at
316.
This
is
precisely
what
Coleman
the
See Harman, 678
ALJ
did,
as
she
conscientiously—and repeatedly—weighed the expert opinions and
resolved the conflicts in favor of Coleman.
Even if we might
have weighed the evidence at issue differently than the ALJ, on
review, we defer to her evaluation of the appropriate weight to
accord these conflicting medical opinions.
IV.
Accordingly,
we
deny
Paramont’s
petition
for
review
and
affirm the decision of the Board to uphold the ALJ’s decision
and order awarding benefits.
We dispense with oral argument
because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented
10
Appeal: 13-1114
Doc: 34
Filed: 04/04/2014
Pg: 11 of 11
in the materials before this Court and argument would not aid
the decisional process.
PETITION DENIED
11
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?