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)
12-1578•Walter F. Smith v. Pine Ridge Coal Company
12-1578Court of Appeals for the Fourth CircuitNov 8, 2012
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 12-1578
WALTER F. SMITH,
Petitioner,
v.
PINE RIDGE COAL COMPANY; DIRECTOR, OFFICE OF WORKERS’
COMPENSATION PROGRAMS, UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF LABOR,
Respondents.
On Petition for Review of an Order of the Benefits Review Board.
(11-0457 BLA; 10-BLA-5498)
Submitted: October 30, 2012 Decided: November 8, 2012
Before MOTZ, FLOYD, and THACKER, Circuit Judges.
Petition denied by unpublished per curiam opinion.
S.F. Raymond Smith, DAVID HUFFMAN LAW SERVICES, Parkersburg,
West Virginia, for Petitioner. Mark E. Solomons, Laura Metcoff
Klaus, GREENBERG TRAURIG LLP, Washington, D.C., for Respondents.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
-- 1 of 2 --
2
PER CURIAM:
Walter F. Smith 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.A.
§§ 901 to 945 (West 2007 & Supp. 2012). Our review of the
record discloses that the Board’s decision is based upon
substantial evidence and is without reversible error.
Accordingly, we deny the petition for review for the reasons
stated by the Board. Smith v. Pine Ridge Coal Co., No. 11-0457
BLA (BRB Mar. 23, 2012). 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.
PETITION DENIED
-- 2 of 2 --
Connect Omnilex to search the legal corpus from your AI assistant.