West Virginia CWP Fund v. Valla Loudermilk

Filing

UNPUBLISHED PER CURIAM OPINION filed. Originating case number: 13-0030-BLA,13-0031-BLA. Copies to all parties and the district court/agency. [999635492]. Mailed to: Valla Loudermilk. [13-2311]

Appeal: 13-2311

Doc: 44

Filed: 08/06/2015

Pg: 1 of 2

UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 13-2311

WEST VIRGINIA CWP FUND, as carrier for LAFAYETTE SPRINGS
ENTERPRISES, INC.,
Petitioner,
v.
VALLA JEAN LOUDERMILK, on behalf of and surviving spouse of
Harold
E.
Loudermilk;
DIRECTOR,
OFFICE
OF
WORKERS’
COMPENSATION PROGRAMS, UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF LABOR,
Respondents.

On Petition for Review of an Order of the Benefits Review Board.
(13-0030-BLA; 13-0031-BLA)

Submitted:

June 30, 2015

Decided:

August 6, 2015

Before NIEMEYER, DIAZ, and FLOYD, Circuit Judges.

Petition denied by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Tiffany Brooke Davis, Ashley Marie Harman, JACKSON KELLY, PLLC,
Morgantown,
West
Virginia,
for
Petitioner.
Valla
Jean
Loudermilk, Respondent Pro Se; Michelle Seyman Gerdano, Gary K.
Stearman, UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF LABOR, Washington, D.C.,
for Respondents.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

Appeal: 13-2311

Doc: 44

Filed: 08/06/2015

Pg: 2 of 2

PER CURIAM:
West Virginia CWP Fund seeks review of the Benefits Review
Board’s

decision

judge’s order

and

on

order

remand

affirming

awarding

the

living

administrative

miner

benefits

law
on

a

claim filed by former miner Harold E. Loudermilk and survivor’s
benefits

to

his

surviving

spouse,

Valla

pursuant to 30 U.S.C. §§ 901-945 (2012). *
record

discloses

that

the

ALJ’s

Jean

Loudermilk,

Our review of the

decision

is

based

upon

substantial evidence and that the Board’s decision is without
reversible error.

Accordingly, we deny the petition for review.

We

oral

dispense

contentions

with
are

argument

adequately

because

presented

in

the

facts

and

the

materials

legal
before

this court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

PETITION DENIED

*

This case was in abeyance pending the decision in Hobet
Mining LLC v. Epling, 783 F.3d 498 (4th Cir. 2015), which was
argued in seriatim with W. Va. CWP Fund v. Bender, 782 F.3d 129
(4th Cir. 2015).
Both cases have been decided, and we have
considered them in our analysis of this appeal.

2