Case ID: f-appx_57/html/0775-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

John A. ISENHART, Petitioner, v. RAILROAD RETIREMENT BOARD, Respondent.
    No. 02-72737.
    RRB No. [ AXXX-XX-XXXX ].
    United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
    Submitted March 10, 2003.
    
    Decided March 14, 2003.
    
      Before CANBY, O’SCANNLAIN, and T.G. NELSON, Circuit Judges.
    
      
       The panel unanimously finds this case suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2).
    
   MEMORANDUM

John A. Isenhart petitions pro se for review of the Railroad Retirement Board’s (“RRB”) decision affirming the hearing officer’s decision that his railroad retirement annuity was properly adjusted to offset his social security benefit. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 45 U.S.C. § 355(f), and we deny the petition for review.

We will not set aside a decision of the RRB “if it is supported by substantial evidence, is not arbitrary and has a reasonable basis in law.” Estes v. R.R. Ret. Bd., 776 F.2d 1436, 1437 (9th Cir.1985) (citation omitted). Because we conclude that the RRB’s decision is supported by substantial evidence and has a reasonable basis in the law, see 45 U.S.C. § 231b(m), we deny the petition for review.

PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED. 
      
       This disposition is not appropriate for publication and may not be cited to or by the courts of this circuit except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.