Barton Carey v. Carolyn Colvin
Filing
UNPUBLISHED PER CURIAM OPINION filed. Originating case number: 1:12-cv-03583-SAG Copies to all parties and the district court/agency. [999394685].. [13-2510]
Appeal: 13-2510
Doc: 23
Filed: 07/14/2014
Pg: 1 of 2
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 13-2510
BARTON CAREY,
Plaintiff - Appellant,
v.
CAROLYN W. COLVIN, Acting Commissioner of Social Security,
Defendant - Appellee.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of
Maryland, at Baltimore.
Stephanie A. Gallagher, Magistrate
Judge. (1:12-cv-03583-SAG)
Submitted:
June 26, 2014
Decided:
July 14, 2014
Before WILKINSON, KING, and WYNN, Circuit Judges.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Paul R. Schlitz, Timothy E. Mering, MERING & SCHLITZ LLC,
Baltimore, Maryland, for Appellant.
Rod J. Rosenstein, United
States Attorney, Alex S. Gordon, Assistant United States
Attorney, Baltimore, Maryland, for Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
Appeal: 13-2510
Doc: 23
Filed: 07/14/2014
Pg: 2 of 2
PER CURIAM:
Barton
Carey
appeals
the
magistrate
judge’s
order
upholding the Commissioner’s denial of Carey’s applications for
disability insurance benefits and supplemental security income,
and the denial of his motion to alter or amend the judgment. ∗
have
thoroughly
reviewed
the
parties’
briefs,
We
administrative
record, and the materials submitted in the joint appendix, and
find
no
reversible
error.
Accordingly,
reasons stated by the district court.
we
affirm
for
Carey v. Colvin, No.
1:12-cv-03583-SAG (D. Md. Sept. 6, 2013; Nov. 7, 2013).
dispense
with
oral
argument
because
the
the
facts
and
We
legal
contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the
court and argument would not aid the decisional process.
AFFIRMED
∗
The parties consented to proceed before a magistrate judge
pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(c) (2012).
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?