Filed: May 20, 2005
Latest Update: Mar. 28, 2017
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 04-1142 LIONEL J. COATES, SR., Plaintiff - Appellant, versus JO ANNE B. BARNHART, Commissioner of the Social Security Administration, Defendant - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at Baltimore. Paul W. Grimm, Magistrate Judge. (CA-02- 2658-PWG) Submitted: March 30, 2005 Decided: May 20, 2005 Before MICHAEL, KING, and GREGORY, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 04-1142 LIONEL J. COATES, SR., Plaintiff - Appellant, versus JO ANNE B. BARNHART, Commissioner of the Social Security Administration, Defendant - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at Baltimore. Paul W. Grimm, Magistrate Judge. (CA-02- 2658-PWG) Submitted: March 30, 2005 Decided: May 20, 2005 Before MICHAEL, KING, and GREGORY, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam o..
More
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 04-1142
LIONEL J. COATES, SR.,
Plaintiff - Appellant,
versus
JO ANNE B. BARNHART, Commissioner of the
Social Security Administration,
Defendant - Appellee.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of
Maryland, at Baltimore. Paul W. Grimm, Magistrate Judge. (CA-02-
2658-PWG)
Submitted: March 30, 2005 Decided: May 20, 2005
Before MICHAEL, KING, and GREGORY, Circuit Judges.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
David Alan Tibbetts, LAW OFFICES OF DAVID A. TIBBETTS, Odenton,
Maryland, for Appellant. Allen F. Loucks, United States Attorney,
Neil R. White, Assistant United States Attorney, Baltimore,
Maryland, for Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
See Local Rule 36(c).
PER CURIAM:
Lionel J. Coates, Sr., appeals the magistrate judge’s
order affirming the Commissioner’s denial of disability insurance
benefits and supplemental security income.* We must uphold the
decision to deny benefits if the decision is supported by
substantial evidence and the correct law was applied. See 42
U.S.C. § 405(g) (2000); Craig v. Chater,
76 F.3d 585, 589 (4th Cir.
1996). We have thoroughly reviewed the administrative record and
the briefs and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm
for the reasons stated by the magistrate judge. Coates v.
Barnhart, No. CA-02-2658-PWG (D. Md. Dec. 3, 2003). 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
*
The parties consented to review by a magistrate judge
pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(c)(2) (2000).
- 2 -