The AI workspace for legal professionals
- Legal research with access to more than 1 million sources
- Document automation
- Matter management
- Hosted in the EU and Switzerland
Try it free for 14 days (10 questions/day during trial)
The AI workspace for legal professionals
Try it free for 14 days (10 questions/day during trial)
06-1158•Clifford H. Muck v. DIRECTOR, OFFICE OF WORKERS’ COMPENSATION PROGRAMS, United States Department to Labor
06-1158Court of Appeals for the Fourth CircuitJun 19, 2006
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 06-1158
CLIFFORD H. MUCK,
Petitioner,
versus
DIRECTOR, OFFICE OF WORKERS’ COMPENSATION
PROGRAMS, United States Department to Labor,
Respondent.
On Petition for Review of a Decision and Order of the Benefits
Review Board (No. 05-0462-BLA)
Submitted: June 15, 2006 Decided: June 19, 2006
Before KING, SHEDD, and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Clifford H. Muck, Petitioner Pro Se. Jeffrey Steven Goldberg,
Christian P. Barber, UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF LABOR, Washington,
D.C., for Respondent.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
See Local Rule 36(c).
-- 1 of 2 --
- 2 -
PER CURIAM:
Clifford H. Muck seeks review of the Benefits Review
Board’s decision and order affirming the administrative law judge’s
denial of black lung benefits pursuant to 30 U.S.C. §§ 901-945
(2000). 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. Muck v. Dir. Office of Workers’ Comp. Prog., No.
05-0462-BLA (BRB Nov. 30, 2005). 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 of 2 --
Connect Omnilex to search the legal corpus from your AI assistant.