Case ID: f-appx_190/html/0244-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "PER CURIAM:", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

Reatha B. LAWTON, Plaintiff—Appellant, v. SOCIAL SECURITY ADMINISTRATION, Defendant—Appellee.
    No. 05-2257.
    United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
    Submitted: June 30, 2006.
    Decided: July 24, 2006.
    Reatha B. Lawton, Appellant Pro Se. Mary Hannah Lauck, Tara Louise Casey, Office of the United States Attorney, Richmond, Virginia, for Appellee.
    Before WILKINSON, WILLIAMS, and TRAXLER, Circuit Judges.
    Affirmed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.
    Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).
   PER CURIAM:

Reatha B. Lawton appeals the district court’s order accepting the magistrate judge’s recommendation and granting summary judgment for the Commissioner on Lawton’s claim that the Administrative Law Judge improperly determined the onset date of her disability as January 20, 2001, and not September 28, 1999. We must uphold the decision if the decision is supported by substantial evidence and the correct law was applied. See 42 U.S.C. § 405(g) (2000); Craig v. Chater, 76 F.3d 585, 589 (4th Cir.1996); see also Villa v. Heckler, 797 F.2d 794, 796 (9th Cir.1986) (noting that the question is whether the chosen onset date is supported by substantial evidence, not whether an earlier date could have been supported). We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. See Lawton v. Social Security Admin., No. CA-03-664-REP (E.D.Va. Sept. 20, 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.