Terry Regan v. Carolyn Colvin

Filing

UNPUBLISHED PER CURIAM OPINION filed. Originating case number: 7:12-cv-00136-D. Copies to all parties and the district court/agency. [999399988]. [13-2251]

Appeal: 13-2251

Doc: 29

Filed: 07/22/2014

Pg: 1 of 4

UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 13-2251

TERRY REGAN,
Plaintiff - Appellant,
v.
CAROLYN W. COLVIN, Acting Commissioner of Social Security,
Defendant – Appellee,
and
MICHAEL J. ASTRUE, Commissioner of Social Security,
Defendant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern
District of North Carolina, at Wilmington. James C. Dever, III,
Chief District Judge. (7:12-cv-00136-D)

Submitted:

June 26, 2014

Before WYNN and
Circuit Judge.

DIAZ,

Decided:

Circuit

Judges,

and

July 22, 2014

HAMILTON,

Senior

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

William
Lee
Davis,
III,
Lumberton,
North
Carolina,
for
Appellant.
Thomas G. Walker, United States Attorney, R. A.
Renfer, Jr., Assistant United States Attorney, Todd J. Lewellen,
Special
Assistant
United
States
Attorney,
Raleigh,
North

Appeal: 13-2251

Doc: 29

Filed: 07/22/2014

Pg: 2 of 4

Carolina, for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

2

Appeal: 13-2251

Doc: 29

Filed: 07/22/2014

Pg: 3 of 4

PER CURIAM:
Terry
adopting

the

supported

Regan

appeals

magistrate

by

Administration

the

judge’s

substantial
Appeals

district

court’s

recommendation

evidence,

Council’s

the

to

affirm,

Social

decision

order

to

as

Security
adopt

the

Administrative Law Judge’s denial of Regan’s applications for
disability

benefits.

Our

review

of

the

Commissioner’s

disability determination is limited to evaluating whether the
findings are supported by substantial evidence and whether the
correct law was applied.
653 (4th Cir. 2005).
evidence

as

a

See Johnson v. Barnhart, 434 F.3d 650,
“Substantial evidence is such relevant

reasonable

support a conclusion.”

mind

might

accept

as

adequate

to

Id. (internal quotation marks omitted).

We do not reweigh evidence or make credibility determinations in
evaluating

whether

a

decision

is

supported

by

substantial

evidence; “[w]here conflicting evidence allows reasonable minds
to differ as to whether a claimant is disabled,” we defer to the
Commissioner’s

decision.

Id.

(internal

quotation

marks

omitted).
Against
the

parties’

this

briefs,

framework,
the

we

have

administrative

thoroughly
record,

reviewed
and

the

materials submitted in the joint appendix, and we discern no
reversible error.
judgment.

Accordingly, we affirm the district court’s

See Regan v. Colvin, No. 7:12–cv–00136–D (E.D.N.C.
3

Appeal: 13-2251

Doc: 29

Filed: 07/22/2014

Sept. 17, 2013).
facts

and

materials

legal
before

Pg: 4 of 4

We dispense with oral argument because the
contentions

are

adequately

this

and

argument

court

presented

would

not

in

the

aid

the

decisional process.

AFFIRMED

4