Case ID: f-appx_22/html/0212-02.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

Eunice J. BLANKENSHIP, Widow of Verner Blankenship, Petitioner, v. BEATRICE POCAHONTAS COAL COMPANY; Director, Office of Workers’ Compensation Programs, United States Department of Labor, Respondents.
    No. 01-1727.
    United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
    Submitted Nov. 29, 2001.
    Decided Dec. 5, 2001.
    Eunice J. Blankenship, Petitioner pro se. Douglas Allan Smoot, Jackson & Kelly, Charleston, WV; Kathy Lynn Snyder, Jackson & Kelly, Morgantown, WV; Patricia May Nece, Barry H. Joyner, United States Department of Labor, Washington, DC, for respondents.
    Before WIDENER, NIEMEYER, and WILLIAMS, Circuit Judges.
   PER CURIAM.

Eunice J. Blankenship seeks review of the Benefits Review Board’s decision and order affirming the administrative law judge’s denial of her claim for survivor’s black lung benefits pursuant to 30 U.S.C .A. §§ 901-945 (West 1986 & Supp. 2001). Our review of the record discloses that the Board’s decision is based upon substantial evidence and is without reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the Board. See Blankenship v. Beatrice Pocahontas Co., No. 00-586-BLA (B.R.B. May 10, 2001). 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. 
      
       We have considered the revisions to the regulations implementing the Black Lung Benefits Act, see Regulations Implementing the Federal Coal Mine Health and Safety Act of 1969, as amended; 65 Fed.Reg. 79,919 (Dec. 20, 2000), and have determined that the revisions do not affect the outcome of this case.