Elawyers Elawyers
Washington| Change

Watson v. Astrue, 10-2066 (2011)

Court: Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit Number: 10-2066 Visitors: 7
Filed: Mar. 16, 2011
Latest Update: Feb. 22, 2020
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 10-2066 OLIVER WENDELL WATSON, JR., Plaintiff - Appellant, v. MICHAEL J. ASTRUE, Commissioner of Social Security, Defendant - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of West Virginia, at Wheeling. Frederick P. Stamp, Jr., Senior District Judge. (5:09-cv-00071-FPS-JSK) Submitted: February 24, 2011 Decided: March 16, 2011 Before NIEMEYER, DAVIS, and KEENAN, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unp
More
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 10-2066 OLIVER WENDELL WATSON, JR., Plaintiff - Appellant, v. MICHAEL J. ASTRUE, Commissioner of Social Security, Defendant - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of West Virginia, at Wheeling. Frederick P. Stamp, Jr., Senior District Judge. (5:09-cv-00071-FPS-JSK) Submitted: February 24, 2011 Decided: March 16, 2011 Before NIEMEYER, DAVIS, and KEENAN, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Oliver Wendell Watson, Jr., Appellant Pro Se. Helen Campbell Altmeyer, Assistant United States Attorney, Wheeling, West Virginia; Beverly Hope Zuckerman, SOCIAL SECURITY ADMINISTRATION, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM: Oliver Wendell Watson, Jr., appeals the district court’s order adopting the magistrate judge’s recommendation and dismissing his disability insurance benefits claim with prejudice and his supplemental security income benefits claim without prejudice. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. Watson v. Astrue, No. 5:09-cv- 00071-FPS-JSK (N.D. W. Va. Sept. 2, 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. AFFIRMED 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