Casey Burner v. Comm of Social Security

Filing

UNPUBLISHED PER CURIAM OPINION filed. Originating case number: 2:13-cv-00028-JPB-JES. Copies to all parties and the district court. [999524157]. [14-1518]

Appeal: 14-1518

Doc: 24

Filed: 02/05/2015

Pg: 1 of 3

UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 14-1518

CASEY LYNN BURNER,
Plaintiff - Appellant,
v.
COMMISSIONER OF SOCIAL SECURITY,
Defendant - Appellee,
and
SOCIAL SECURITY ADMINISTRATION,
Party-in-Interest.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern
District of West Virginia, at Elkins.
John Preston Bailey,
Chief District Judge. (2:13-cv-00028-JPB-JES)

Submitted:

December 8, 2014

Decided:

February 5, 2015

Before MOTZ and KEENAN, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior
Circuit Judge.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Travis M. Miller, TRAVIS MILLER ATTORNEY AT LAW, PLLC,
Bridgeport, West Virginia, for Appellant. William J. Ihlenfeld,
II, United States Attorney, Helen Campbell Altmeyer, Assistant
United States Attorney, OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY,
Wheeling, West Virginia; Nora Koch, Acting Regional Chief

Appeal: 14-1518

Doc: 24

Filed: 02/05/2015

Pg: 2 of 3

Counsel, Stephen Giacchino, Supervisory Attorney, David Leach,
Special Assistant United States Attorney, Office of the General
Counsel,
SOCIAL
SECURITY
ADMINISTRATION,
Philadelphia,
Pennsylvania, for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

- 2 -

Appeal: 14-1518

Doc: 24

Filed: 02/05/2015

Pg: 3 of 3

PER CURIAM:
Casey
court’s

Lynn

order

recommendation

Burner
adopting

(Burner)
the

recommending

appeals

magistrate

from

the

the

judge’s

district

court

district

report

grant

and

summary

judgment in favor of the Commissioner of Social Security with
respect to Burner’s challenge to the denial of her application
for

childhood

Subchapter

supplemental

XVI

§§ 1381-1385.

of

the

After

security

Social

reviewing

income

Security

the

briefs

benefits
Act,

and

the

42

under
U.S.C.

record

on

appeal, we conclude there is no reversible error in the district
court’s

decision.

Thus,

we

affirm

on

the

reasoning

magistrate judge, as adopted by the district court.

of

the

Burner v.

Commissioner, No. 2:13–cv–00028, 2014 WL 1479201 (N.D.W.Va. Apr.
15, 2014).
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

- 3 -