Filed: May 05, 2011
Latest Update: Feb. 22, 2020
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 10-2150 RUSSELL E. LAMBERT, Petitioner, v. FRANK ARNOLD CONTRACTORS, INCORPORATED; DIRECTOR, OFFICE OF WORKERS’ COMPENSATION PROGRAMS, Respondents. On Petition for Review of an Order of the Benefits Review Board. (09-0658-BLA) Submitted: March 29, 2011 Decided: May 5, 2011 Before KEENAN and WYNN, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge. Petition denied by unpublished per curiam opinion. Russell E. Lambert, Petitione
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 10-2150 RUSSELL E. LAMBERT, Petitioner, v. FRANK ARNOLD CONTRACTORS, INCORPORATED; DIRECTOR, OFFICE OF WORKERS’ COMPENSATION PROGRAMS, Respondents. On Petition for Review of an Order of the Benefits Review Board. (09-0658-BLA) Submitted: March 29, 2011 Decided: May 5, 2011 Before KEENAN and WYNN, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge. Petition denied by unpublished per curiam opinion. Russell E. Lambert, Petitioner..
More
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 10-2150
RUSSELL E. LAMBERT,
Petitioner,
v.
FRANK ARNOLD CONTRACTORS, INCORPORATED; DIRECTOR, OFFICE OF
WORKERS’ COMPENSATION PROGRAMS,
Respondents.
On Petition for Review of an Order of the Benefits Review Board.
(09-0658-BLA)
Submitted: March 29, 2011 Decided: May 5, 2011
Before KEENAN and WYNN, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior
Circuit Judge.
Petition denied by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Russell E. Lambert, Petitioner Pro Se. Paul Edwin Frampton,
BOWLES, RICE, MCDAVID, GRAFF & LOVE, PLLC, Charleston, West
Virginia; Sarah Marie Hurley, UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF LABOR,
Washington, D.C., for Respondents.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
Russell E. Lambert seeks review of the Benefits Review
Board’s decision and order affirming the administrative law
judge’s denial of black lung benefits pursuant to 30 U.S.C.
§§ 901-945 (2006). 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. Lambert v. Frank
Arnold Contractors, Inc., No. 09-0658-BLA (B.R.B. May 14 & Sept.
8, 2010). 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.
PETITION DENIED
2