Clinchfield Coal Company v. Sharon Fleming


UNPUBLISHED PER CURIAM OPINION filed. Originating case number: 15-0201 BLA. Copies to all parties and the agency. [1000021314]. [16-1465]

Download PDF
Appeal: 16-1465 Doc: 34 Filed: 02/10/2017 Pg: 1 of 2 UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 16-1465 CLINCHFIELD COAL COMPANY, Petitioner, v. SHARON L. FLEMING, Widow of Paul Fleming; DIRECTOR, OFFICE OF WORKERS’ COMPENSATION PROGRAMS, UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF LABOR, Respondents. On Petition for Review of an Order of the Benefits Review Board. (15-0201-BLA) Submitted: January 24, 2017 Decided: February 10, 2017 Before NIEMEYER and THACKER, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge. Petition denied by unpublished per curiam opinion. Timothy W. Gresham, PENN, STUART & ESKRIDGE, Abingdon, Virginia, for Petitioner. Joseph E. Wolfe, WOLFE WILLIAMS & REYNOLDS, Norton, Virginia; Sean Gregory Bajkowski, Sarah Marie Hurley, UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF LABOR, Washington, D.C., for Respondents. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. Appeal: 16-1465 Doc: 34 Filed: 02/10/2017 Pg: 2 of 2 PER CURIAM: Clinchfield Coal Company seeks review of the Benefits Review Board’s decision and order affirming the administrative law judge’s award of benefits to Sharon Fleming, the surviving spouse of deceased coal miner Paul Fleming, under the Black Lung Benefits Act, 30 U.S.C. §§ 901-944 (2012). Our review of the record discloses that the Board’s decision is based upon substantial evidence and is without reversible error. Accordingly, we deny the petition for review for the reasons stated by the Board. Clinchfield Coal Co. v. Fleming, No. 15-0201 BLA (B.R.B. Feb. 26, 2016). We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before this court and argument would not aid the decisional process. PETITION DENIED 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?