Mud Lick Mining Corporation; American Mining Insurance Company v. Charles R. Hash

UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 12-1688
MUD LICK MINING CORPORATION; AMERICAN MINING INSURANCE
COMPANY,
Petitioners,
v.
CHARLES R. HASH; DIRECTOR, OFFICE OF WORKERS’ COMPENSATION
PROGRAMS, UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF LABOR,
Respondents.
On Petition for Review of an Order of the Benefits Review Board.
(11-0402 BLA)
Submitted: March 28, 2014 Decided: April 11, 2014
Before NIEMEYER, SHEDD, and FLOYD, Circuit Judges.
Petition denied by unpublished per curiam opinion.
John R. Sigmond, PENN, STUART & ESKRIDGE, Bristol, Tennessee,
for Petitioners. Joseph E. Wolfe, Ryan C. Gilligan, WOLFE,
WILLIAMS, RUTHERFORD & REYNOLDS, Norton, Virginia; M. Patricia
Smith, Solicitor of Labor, Rae Ellen James, Associate Solicitor,
Gary K. Stearman, Appellate Litigation, Jonathan P. Rolfe,
UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF LABOR, Washington, D.C., for
Respondents.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

-- 1 of 2 --

2
PER CURIAM:
Mud Lick Mining Corporation and American Mining
Insurance Company seek review of the Benefits Review Board’s
decision and order affirming the administrative law judge’s
award of black lung benefits pursuant to 30 U.S.C. §§ 901-945
(2012). We have reviewed the parties’ briefs and the record on
appeal and conclude 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. Mud Lick Mining Corp. v. Hash, No. 11-0402
BLA (B.R.B. Mar. 29, 2012). 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.
PETITION DENIED

-- 2 of 2 --