Patricia St. Clair, as personal representative of the estate of John St. Clair v. Director, Office of Workers’ Compensation Programs

UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 06-1485
PATRICIA ST. CLAIR, as personal representative
of the estate of John St. Clair,
Petitioner,
versus
DIRECTOR, OFFICE OF WORKERS’ COMPENSATION
PROGRAMS; CONSOLIDATION COAL COMPANY,
Respondents.
No. 06-1628
CONSOLIDATION COAL COMPANY,
Petitioner,
DIRECTOR, OFFICE OF WORKERS’ COMPENSATION
PROGRAMS,
Party-in-interest,
versus
PATRICIA ST. CLAIR, as personal representative
of the estate of John St. Clair,
Respondent.

-- 1 of 3 --

- 2 -
On Petitions for Review of an Order of the Benefits Review Board.
(05-548-BLA)
Submitted: November 17, 2006 Decided: January 18, 2007
Before NIEMEYER and TRAXLER, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior
Circuit Judge.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Patricia St. Clair, Petitioner/Cross-Respondent Pro Se. Patricia
May Nece, Barry H. Joyner, UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF LABOR,
Washington, D.C., for Respondent Director. William Steele
Mattingly, Ashley M. Harman, JACKSON & KELLY, PLLC, Morgantown,
West Virginia, for Respondent/Cross-Petitioner Consolidation Coal
Company.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

-- 2 of 3 --

- 3 -
PER CURIAM:
In No. 06-1485, claimant seeks review of the Benefits
Review Board’s (“Board”) decision and order affirming the
administrative law judge’s (“ALJ”) denial of black lung benefits
pursuant to 30 U.S.C. §§ 901-945 (2000). In No. 06-1628,
Consolidation Coal Company cross-petitions for review of the
Board’s affirmance of the ALJ’s conclusion that St. Clair’s claim
for benefits was timely filed. Our review of the record discloses
that the Board’s decision is based upon substantial evidence and is
without reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons
stated by the Board. St. Clair v. Director, OWCP, No. 05-548-BLA
(B.R.B. Mar. 28, 2006). We deny St. Clair’s motion to expedite the
appeal. 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

-- 3 of 3 --