Billy Ray Jackson v. Commissioner of S.S.A.


UNPUBLISHED PER CURIAM OPINION filed. Originating case number: 1:16-cv-03956-SAG Copies to all parties and the district court/agency. [1000144776]. Mailed to: Billy Ray Jackson. [17-1787]

Download PDF
Appeal: 17-1787 Doc: 15 Filed: 08/28/2017 Pg: 1 of 2 UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 17-1787 BILLY RAY JACKSON, Plaintiff - Appellant, v. COMMISSIONER OF SOCIAL SECURITY, Defendant -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. (1:16-cv-03956-SAG) Submitted: August 24, 2017 Decided: August 28, 2017 Before GREGORY, Chief Judge, and SHEDD and DIAZ, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Billy Ray Jackson, Appellant Pro Se. Kathleen Carole Buckner, SOCIAL SECURITY ADMINISTRATION, Baltimore, Maryland; Vickie Elaine LeDuc, OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Baltimore, Maryland, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. Appeal: 17-1787 Doc: 15 Filed: 08/28/2017 Pg: 2 of 2 PER CURIAM: Billy Ray Jackson appeals the magistrate judge’s order affirming the Commissioner’s denial of Jackson’s claim for disability insurance benefits. * On appeal, we confine our review to the issues raised in the Appellant’s brief. See 4th Cir. R. 34(b). Because Jackson’s informal briefs do not challenge the basis for the magistrate judge’s disposition, Jackson has forfeited appellate review of the magistrate judge’s order. See Williams v. Giant Food Inc., 370 F.3d 423, 430 n.4 (4th Cir. 2004). Accordingly, we affirm. 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. AFFIRMED * The parties consented to a final disposition by the 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?