Case Name: Esau CANTERBURY, for Roman CANTERBURY, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Michael J. ASTRUE, Commissioner of Social Security, Defendant-Appellee
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2009-07-23
Citations: 328 F. App'x 858
Docket Number: No. 08-2225
Parties: Esau CANTERBURY, for Roman CANTERBURY, Plaintiff—Appellant, v. Michael J. ASTRUE, Commissioner of Social Security, Defendant—Appellee.
Judges: Before NIEMEYER and SHEDD, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 328
Pages: 858–858

Head Matter:
Esau CANTERBURY, for Roman CANTERBURY, Plaintiff—Appellant, v. Michael J. ASTRUE, Commissioner of Social Security, Defendant—Appellee.
No. 08-2225.
United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
Submitted: July 10, 2009.
Decided: July 23, 2009.
Leonard Stayton, Inez, Kentucky, for Appellant. Eric P. Kressman, Acting Regional Chief Counsel, Rafael Melendez, Supervisory Attorney, Lori Karimoto, Assistant United States Attorney, Social Security Administration, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, Charles T. Miller, United States Attorney, Carol A. Casto, Assistant United States Attorney, Charleston, West Virginia, for Appellee.
Before NIEMEYER and SHEDD, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge.

Opinion:
Affirmed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
Esau Canterbury, on behalf of his son, Roman Canterbury, appeals the district court's order accepting the magistrate judge's recommendation to grant the Commissioner's motion for judgment on the pleadings and terminate his child's social security supplemental income benefits.
We must uphold the district court's disability determination if it is supported by substantial evidence. 42 U.S.C. § 405(g) (2009); Hays v. Sullivan, 907 F.2d 1453, 1456 (4th Cir.1990). We have reviewed the record in light of Canterbury's arguments on appeal and find substantial evidence supports the Commissioner's finding that the child's medical condition had improved such that disability benefits should cease. See 20 C.F.R. § 404.1594 (2009). Accordingly, we affirm the termination of benefits. 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.