Elawyers Elawyers
Washington| Change

Jack M. Ofsa v. Director, Office of Workers' Compensation Programs, United States Department of Labor, Eastern Associated Coal Corporation, 91-1711 (1991)

Court: Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit Number: 91-1711 Visitors: 6
Filed: Apr. 25, 1991
Latest Update: Feb. 22, 2020
Summary: 931 F.2d 887 Unpublished Disposition NOTICE: Fourth Circuit I.O.P. 36.6 states that citation of unpublished dispositions is disfavored except for establishing res judicata, estoppel, or the law of the case and requires service of copies of cited unpublished dispositions of the Fourth Circuit. Jack M. OFSA, Petitioner, v. DIRECTOR, OFFICE OF WORKERS' COMPENSATION PROGRAMS, UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF LABOR, Eastern Associated Coal Corporation, Respondents. No. 91-1711. United States Court of Appe
More

931 F.2d 887
Unpublished Disposition

NOTICE: Fourth Circuit I.O.P. 36.6 states that citation of unpublished dispositions is disfavored except for establishing res judicata, estoppel, or the law of the case and requires service of copies of cited unpublished dispositions of the Fourth Circuit.
Jack M. OFSA, Petitioner,
v.
DIRECTOR, OFFICE OF WORKERS' COMPENSATION PROGRAMS, UNITED
STATES DEPARTMENT OF LABOR, Eastern Associated
Coal Corporation, Respondents.

No. 91-1711.

United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.

Submitted April 8, 1991.
Decided April 25, 1991.

On Petition for Review of an Order of the Benefits Review Board.

Jack M. Ofsa, petitioner pro se.

Helen Hart Cox, Barbara J. Johnson, United States Department of Labor, Paul Edwin Frampton, Bowles, Rice, McDavid, Graff & Love, Charleston, W.Va., for respondents.

Ben.Rev.Bd.

AFFIRMED.

Before MURNAGHAN, SPROUSE and NIEMEYER, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:

1

Jack M. Ofsa 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. Secs. 901 et seq. Our review of the record and the Board's decision and order discloses that this appeal is without merit. Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the Board. Ofsa v. Director, Office of Workers' Compensation Programs, 88-2940-BLA (Ben.Rev.Bd. Dec. 10, 1990). 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.

2

AFFIRMED.

Source:  CourtListener

Can't find what you're looking for?

Post a free question on our public forum.
Ask a Question
Search for lawyers by practice areas.
Find a Lawyer