Thurmond B. Bowers v. MICHAEL J. ASTRUE, Commissioner of Social Security

Filed: July 29, 2008
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 07-1546
(3:05-cv-03477-JRM)
THURMOND B. BOWERS,
Plaintiff - Appellant,
versus
MICHAEL J. ASTRUE, Commissioner of Social
Security,
Defendant - Appellee.
O R D E R
The court amends its opinion filed June 20, 2008, as follows:
On the cover sheet, attorney information section -- the name
of Carolyn Cooper, Special Assistant United States Attorney, is
added as counsel for Appellee.
For the Court - By Direction
/s/ Patricia S. Connor
Clerk

-- 1 of 3 --

UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 07-1546
THURMOND B. BOWERS,
Plaintiff - Appellant,
versus
MICHAEL J. ASTRUE, Commissioner of Social
Security,
Defendant - Appellee.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of
South Carolina, at Columbia. Joseph R. McCrorey, Magistrate Judge.
(3:05-cv-03477-JRM)
Submitted: February 12, 2008 Decided: June 20, 2008
Before MICHAEL, KING, and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Robertson H. Wendt, Jr., LAW OFFICES OF ROBERTSON WENDT, North
Charleston, South Carolina, for Appellant. Deana R. Ertl-Lombardi,
Regional Chief Counsel, Yvette G. Keesee, Deputy Regional Chief
Counsel, Thomas S. Inman, Assistant Regional Counsel, Carolyn
Cooper, Special Assistant United States Attorney, Denver, Colorado,
for Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

-- 2 of 3 --

*The parties consented to referral to a magistrate judge for
final disposition under 28 U.S.C. § 636(c) (2000).
- 2 -
PER CURIAM:
Thurmond B. Bowers appeals the magistrate judge’s order
upholding the denial of his application for disability insurance
benefits. * We have reviewed the record and find no reversible
error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the
magistrate judge. See Bowers v. Astrue, No. 3:05-cv-03477-JRM
(D.S.C. Mar. 7, 2007). 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 --