REGINA A. BALL, Administratrix of the Estate of Michael Ball v. WILLIAM A. HALTER, Acting Commissioner of Social Security

UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 01-1085
REGINA A. BALL, Administratrix of the Estate
of Michael Ball; MICHAEL BALL,
Plaintiffs - Appellants,
versus
WILLIAM A. HALTER, Acting Commissioner of
Social Security,
Defendant - Appellee.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern Dis-
trict of West Virginia, at Bluefield. Mary S. Feinberg, Magistrate
Judge. (CA-99-1048-1)
Submitted: July 31, 2001 Decided: August 9, 2001
Before WILLIAMS, MICHAEL, and MOTZ, Circuit Judges.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Jerome J. McFadden, BAYLESS & MCFADDEN, L.L.P., Princeton, West
Virginia, for Appellant. James A. Winn, Regional Chief Counsel,
Region III, Lori R. Karimoto, Assistant Regional Counsel, Office of
the General Counsel, SOCIAL SECURITY ADMINISTRATION, Philadelphia,
Pennsylvania; Rebecca A. Betts, United States Attorney, Kelly R.
Curry, Assistant United States Attorney, Charleston, West Virginia,
for Appellee.

-- 1 of 2 --

1 Michael Ball died during the pendency of his case.
2 The parties consented to jurisdiction of the magistrate
judge pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(c) (1994).
2
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
See Local Rule 36(c).
PER CURIAM:
Regina A. Ball, Administratrix of the Estate of Michael Ball, 1
appeals the magistrate judge’s order denying Ball’s motion for
judgment on the pleadings, granting the Commissioner’s motion for
judgment on the pleadings, and upholding the Commissioner’s denial
of disability insurance benefits. 2 We have reviewed the briefs and
the administrative record in light of the claims raised on appeal,
and find well-reasoned the magistrate judge’s opinion that sub-
stantial evidence supports the Commissioner’s decision denying
benefits.
Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the magistrate
judge. (J.A. at 19-31). We dispense with oral argument because
the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the ma-
terials before the Court and argument would not aid the decisional
process.
AFFIRMED

-- 2 of 2 --