Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • Clemons v. Commissioner, Soc, 4th Cir. (2003)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    1 views2 pages
    The United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit affirmed the magistrate judge's ruling that upheld the Commissioner's denial of Social Security disability benefits to Phillip Clemons prior to August 10, 1997. The court reviewed the record and determined that the Commissioner's decision was supported by substantial evidence. The court agreed with the magistrate judge's reasoning and affirmed based on the same reasoning provided in the lower court ruling. The court also determined that oral arguments were not necessary because the facts, legal contentions, and materials in the case were adequately presented.

    Original Description:

    Filed: 2003-07-21 Precedential Status: Non-Precedential Docket: 03-1247

    Copyright

    © Public Domain

    Available Formats

    PDF or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    Report this Document
    The United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit affirmed the magistrate judge's ruling that upheld the Commissioner's denial of Social Security disability benefits to Phillip Clemons prior to August 10, 1997. The court reviewed the record and determined that the Commissioner's decision was supported by substantial evidence. The court agreed with the magistrate judge's reasoning and affirmed based on the same reasoning provided in the lower court ruling. The court also determined that oral arguments were not necessary because the facts, legal contentions, and materials in the case were adequately presented.

    Copyright:

    Public Domain
    Download as PDF or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    1 views2 pages

    Clemons v. Commissioner, Soc, 4th Cir. (2003)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    The United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit affirmed the magistrate judge's ruling that upheld the Commissioner's denial of Social Security disability benefits to Phillip Clemons prior to August 10, 1997. The court reviewed the record and determined that the Commissioner's decision was supported by substantial evidence. The court agreed with the magistrate judge's reasoning and affirmed based on the same reasoning provided in the lower court ruling. The court also determined that oral arguments were not necessary because the facts, legal contentions, and materials in the case were adequately presented.

    Copyright:

    Public Domain
    Download as PDF or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    of 2

    UNPUBLISHED

    UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS


    FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

    No. 03-1247

    PHILLIP A. CLEMONS,
    Plaintiff - Appellant,
    versus
    COMMISSIONER OF SOCIAL SECURITY,
    Defendant - Appellee.

    Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western
    District of Virginia, at Danville.
    Glen E. Conrad, Magistrate
    Judge. (CA-02-4-4)

    Submitted:

    June 24, 2003

    Decided:

    July 21, 2003

    Before LUTTIG, WILLIAMS, and GREGORY, Circuit Judges.

    Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

    Phillip A. Clemons, Appellant Pro Se.


    James Anthony Winn,
    Assistant Regional Counsel, Dina White Griffin, SOCIAL SECURITY
    ADMINISTRATION, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania; Julie C. Dudley,
    Assistant United States Attorney, Sara Bugbee Winn, OFFICE OF THE
    UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Roanoke, Virginia, for Appellee.

    Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.


    See Local Rule 36(c).

    PER CURIAM:
    Phillip A. Clemons seeks review of the magistrate judge's
    order* affirming the Commissioner's denial of Social Security
    disability insurance benefits to Clemons prior to August 10, 1997,
    based on its finding that Clemons was not totally disabled until
    that date. We review the Commissioners final decision to determine
    whether it is supported by substantial evidence and whether the
    correct law was applied.
    Cir.

    1995).

    Commissioners

    We

    have

    Pass v. Chater, 65 F.3d 1200, 1203 (4th


    reviewed

    decision

    is

    the

    based

    record

    upon

    and

    conclude

    substantial

    the

    evidence.

    Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the magistrate judge.


    See Clemons v. Commissioner of Social Security, No. CA-02-4-4 (W.D.
    Va. Jan. 28, 2003).
    facts

    and

    materials

    legal
    before

    We dispense with oral argument because the

    contentions
    the

    court

    are

    adequately

    and

    argument

    presented

    would

    not

    in

    the

    aid

    the

    decisional process.

    AFFIRMED

    The parties consented to review by a magistrate judge


    pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 636(c)(2) (2000).
    2

    You might also like