Case Name: William T. ADKINS, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Michael H. HOLLAND; Marty D. Hudson; Joseph P. Brennan; B.V. Hyler, As Trustees; United Mine Workers of America, 1974 Pension Plan and Trust, Defendants-Appellees
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2004-02-17
Citations: 87 F. App'x 886
Docket Number: No. 03-1377
Parties: William T. ADKINS, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Michael H. HOLLAND; Marty D. Hudson; Joseph P. Brennan; B.V. Hyler, As Trustees; United Mine Workers of America, 1974 Pension Plan and Trust, Defendants—Appellees.
Judges: 
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 87
Pages: 886–887

Head Matter:
William T. ADKINS, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Michael H. HOLLAND; Marty D. Hudson; Joseph P. Brennan; B.V. Hyler, As Trustees; United Mine Workers of America, 1974 Pension Plan and Trust, Defendants—Appellees.
No. 03-1377.
United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
Submitted Jan. 28, 2004.
Decided Feb. 17, 2004.
Robert B. Wilson, Charleston, West Virginia, for Appellant. Glenda S. Finch, Deputy General Counsel, Christopher F. Clarke, Senior Assistant General Counsel, Washington, D.C., for Appellees.
Before MOTZ and SHEDD, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge.
Affirmed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).

Opinion:
PER CURIAM.
William T. Adkins appeals the district court's order dismissing, under Fed. R.Civ.P. 12(b)(6), all but one of his claims for disability pension benefits under the provisions of the United Mine Workers of America 1974 Pension Plan, and the order granting summary judgment to the Trustees of the Plan on his remaining claim. We have reviewed the record and the district court's opinion and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the district court. See Adkins v. Holland, No. CA-02-249-2 (S.D.W. Va. Aug. 20, 2002 & Mar. 24, 2003). 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