Elawyers Elawyers
Ohio| Change

Sere v. Apfel, Commissioner, 98-1309 (1998)

Court: Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit Number: 98-1309 Visitors: 21
Filed: May 27, 1998
Latest Update: Mar. 28, 2017
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 98-1309 JOSEPH T. SERE, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus KENNETH S. APFEL, COMMISSIONER OF SOCIAL SECURITY, Defendant - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern Dis- trict of Virginia, at Alexandria. Barry R. Poretz, Magistrate Judge. (CA-97-1055-A) Submitted: May 14, 1998 Decided: May 27, 1998 Before WIDENER and MICHAEL, Circuit Judges, and BUTZNER, Senior Circuit Judge. Affirmed by unpublished per
More
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 98-1309 JOSEPH T. SERE, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus KENNETH S. APFEL, COMMISSIONER OF SOCIAL SECURITY, Defendant - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern Dis- trict of Virginia, at Alexandria. Barry R. Poretz, Magistrate Judge. (CA-97-1055-A) Submitted: May 14, 1998 Decided: May 27, 1998 Before WIDENER and MICHAEL, Circuit Judges, and BUTZNER, Senior Circuit Judge. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Joseph T. Sere, Appellant Pro Se. Adam Trevor Ackerman, SOCIAL SECURITY ADMINISTRATION, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c). PER CURIAM: Appellant appeals the magistrate judge's order granting the Commissioner's motion for summary judgment on Appellant's complaint seeking review of the Commissioner's denial of social security benefits. * We have reviewed the record and the magistrate judge's opinion and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the magistrate judge. Sere v. Apfel, No. CA-97- 1055-A (E.D.Va. Feb. 9, 1998). 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 deci- sional process. AFFIRMED * The parties consented to jurisdiction of the magistrate judge pursuant to 28 U.S.C.A. ยง 636(c) (West 1994 & Supp. 1998). 2
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