Filed: Jun. 18, 1997
Latest Update: Mar. 28, 2017
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 96-2334 HERBERT WORKMAN, Petitioner, versus DIRECTOR, OFFICE OF WORKERS' COMPENSATION PRO- GRAMS, UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF LABOR, Respondent. On Petition for Review of an Order of the Benefits Review Board. (95-1122-BLA) Submitted: May 30, 1997 Decided: June 18, 1997 Before WIDENER and WILKINS, Circuit Judges, and PHILLIPS, Senior Circuit Judge. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Herbert Workman, Petitioner Pro Se.
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 96-2334 HERBERT WORKMAN, Petitioner, versus DIRECTOR, OFFICE OF WORKERS' COMPENSATION PRO- GRAMS, UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF LABOR, Respondent. On Petition for Review of an Order of the Benefits Review Board. (95-1122-BLA) Submitted: May 30, 1997 Decided: June 18, 1997 Before WIDENER and WILKINS, Circuit Judges, and PHILLIPS, Senior Circuit Judge. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Herbert Workman, Petitioner Pro Se. ..
More
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 96-2334 HERBERT WORKMAN, Petitioner, versus DIRECTOR, OFFICE OF WORKERS' COMPENSATION PRO- GRAMS, UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF LABOR, Respondent. On Petition for Review of an Order of the Benefits Review Board. (95-1122-BLA) Submitted: May 30, 1997 Decided: June 18, 1997 Before WIDENER and WILKINS, Circuit Judges, and PHILLIPS, Senior Circuit Judge. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Herbert Workman, Petitioner Pro Se. Christian P. Barber, Jill M. Otte, UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF LABOR, Washington, D.C., for Respondent. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c). PER CURIAM: Appellant 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.A. ยงยง 901-945 (West 1986 & Supp. 1996). Our review of the record discloses that the Board's decision is based upon substantial evidence and is without reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the Board. Workman v. Director, Office of Workers' Compensation Programs, No. 95-1122-BLA (B.R.B. July 30, 1996). We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the mate- rials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process. AFFIRMED 2