Filed: Apr. 20, 2009
Latest Update: Mar. 28, 2017
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 08-2000 LOUISE FRANCES GILBERT, Petitioner, v. DIRECTOR, OFFICE OF WORKERS’ COMPENSATION PROGRAMS, Respondent. On Petition for Review of an Order of the Benefits Review Board. (07-0851-BLA) Submitted: April 16, 2009 Decided: April 20, 2009 Before WILKINSON, NIEMEYER, and SHEDD, Circuit Judges. Petition denied by unpublished per curiam opinion. Louise Frances Gilbert, Petitioner Pro Se. Sean Gregory Bajkowski, Sarah Marie Hurle
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 08-2000 LOUISE FRANCES GILBERT, Petitioner, v. DIRECTOR, OFFICE OF WORKERS’ COMPENSATION PROGRAMS, Respondent. On Petition for Review of an Order of the Benefits Review Board. (07-0851-BLA) Submitted: April 16, 2009 Decided: April 20, 2009 Before WILKINSON, NIEMEYER, and SHEDD, Circuit Judges. Petition denied by unpublished per curiam opinion. Louise Frances Gilbert, Petitioner Pro Se. Sean Gregory Bajkowski, Sarah Marie Hurley..
More
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 08-2000 LOUISE FRANCES GILBERT, Petitioner, v. DIRECTOR, OFFICE OF WORKERS’ COMPENSATION PROGRAMS, Respondent. On Petition for Review of an Order of the Benefits Review Board. (07-0851-BLA) Submitted: April 16, 2009 Decided: April 20, 2009 Before WILKINSON, NIEMEYER, and SHEDD, Circuit Judges. Petition denied by unpublished per curiam opinion. Louise Frances Gilbert, Petitioner Pro Se. Sean Gregory Bajkowski, Sarah Marie Hurley, UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF LABOR, Washington, D.C., for Respondent. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM: Louise Frances Gilbert 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. Gilbert v. Director, OWCP, No. 07-0851-BLA (B.R.B. July 9, 2008). 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
