Filed: Jul. 31, 2013
Latest Update: Mar. 28, 2017
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 13-1246 WILLIAM GROSS, Plaintiff - Appellant, v. CAROLYN W. COLVIN, Acting Commissioner of Social Security, Defendant - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at Baltimore. Stephanie A. Gallagher, Magistrate Judge. (1:10-cv-02416-SAG) Submitted: July 19, 2013 Decided: July 31, 2013 Before NIEMEYER, AGEE, and THACKER, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Ellio
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 13-1246 WILLIAM GROSS, Plaintiff - Appellant, v. CAROLYN W. COLVIN, Acting Commissioner of Social Security, Defendant - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at Baltimore. Stephanie A. Gallagher, Magistrate Judge. (1:10-cv-02416-SAG) Submitted: July 19, 2013 Decided: July 31, 2013 Before NIEMEYER, AGEE, and THACKER, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Elliot..
More
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 13-1246
WILLIAM GROSS,
Plaintiff - Appellant,
v.
CAROLYN W. COLVIN, Acting Commissioner of Social Security,
Defendant - Appellee.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of
Maryland, at Baltimore. Stephanie A. Gallagher, Magistrate
Judge. (1:10-cv-02416-SAG)
Submitted: July 19, 2013 Decided: July 31, 2013
Before NIEMEYER, AGEE, and THACKER, Circuit Judges.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Elliott Andalman, ANDALMAN & FLYNN, P.C., Silver Spring,
Maryland, for Appellant. Rod J. Rosenstein, United States
Attorney, Alex S. Gordon, Assistant United States Attorney,
Baltimore, Maryland, for Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
William Gross appeals the magistrate judge’s order
affirming the Commissioner’s decision to deny Gross supplemental
security income under the Social Security Act. * We must uphold
the decision to deny benefits if the decision is supported by
substantial evidence and the correct law was applied. See 42
U.S.C. § 405(g) (2006); Johnson v. Barnhart,
434 F.3d 650, 653
(4th Cir. 2005) (per curiam). Having thoroughly reviewed the
parties’ briefs, the administrative record, and the materials
submitted in the joint appendix, we find no reversible error.
Accordingly, we affirm. See Gross v. Astrue, No. 1:10-cv-02416-
SAG (D. Md. Dec. 28, 2012). We dispense with oral argument
because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented
in the materials before this court and argument would not aid
the decisional process.
AFFIRMED
*
The parties consented to the jurisdiction of the
magistrate judge in accordance with 28 U.S.C. § 636(c) (2006).
2