Filed: Sep. 28, 2020
Latest Update: Sep. 28, 2020
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 20-1464 DESPINA NEUPH LUCAS, Plaintiff - Appellant, v. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Social Security Administration, Defendant - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina, at Elizabeth City. Louise W. Flanagan, District Judge. (2:18-cv-00059-FL) Submitted: September 24, 2020 Decided: September 28, 2020 Before HARRIS and RICHARDSON, Circuit Judges, and TRAXLER, Senior Circuit
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 20-1464 DESPINA NEUPH LUCAS, Plaintiff - Appellant, v. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Social Security Administration, Defendant - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina, at Elizabeth City. Louise W. Flanagan, District Judge. (2:18-cv-00059-FL) Submitted: September 24, 2020 Decided: September 28, 2020 Before HARRIS and RICHARDSON, Circuit Judges, and TRAXLER, Senior Circuit J..
More
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 20-1464 DESPINA NEUPH LUCAS, Plaintiff - Appellant, v. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Social Security Administration, Defendant - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina, at Elizabeth City. Louise W. Flanagan, District Judge. (2:18-cv-00059-FL) Submitted: September 24, 2020 Decided: September 28, 2020 Before HARRIS and RICHARDSON, Circuit Judges, and TRAXLER, Senior Circuit Judge. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Despina Neuph Lucas, Appellant Pro Se. Nathaniel James Heber, Office of General Counsel, Region IV, SOCIAL SECURITY ADMINISTRATION, Atlanta, Georgia, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM: Despina Lucas appeals the district court’s order accepting the recommendation of the magistrate judge and denying relief on Lucas’ civil action against the United States Social Security Administration. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. Lucas v. United States, No. 2:18-cv-00059-FL (E.D.N.C. Apr. 8, 2020). 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 2