Case Name: Carroll HORTON, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Jo Anne B. BARNHART, Commissioner of Social Security, Defendant-Appellee
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2005-02-17
Citations: 122 F. App'x 54
Docket Number: No. 04-2068
Parties: Carroll HORTON, Plaintiff—Appellant, v. Jo Anne B. BARNHART, Commissioner of Social Security, Defendant—Appellee.
Judges: Before GREGORY and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 122
Pages: 54–54

Head Matter:
Carroll HORTON, Plaintiff—Appellant, v. Jo Anne B. BARNHART, Commissioner of Social Security, Defendant—Appellee.
No. 04-2068.
United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
Submitted: Jan. 21, 2005.
Decided: Feb. 17, 2005.
Charles L. Martin, Decatur, Georgia, Paul T. McChesney, Spartanburg, South Carolina, for Appellant.
Frank W. Hunger, Assistant Attorney General, J. Strom Thurmond, Jr., United States Attorney, Marvin J. Caughman, Assistant United States Attorney, Deana R. Ertl-Lombardi, Regional Chief Counsel, Laura Ridgell-Boltz, Assistant Regional Counsel, Denver, Colorado, for Appellee.
Before GREGORY and DUNCAN, 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Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.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:
Carroll N. Horton ("Horton") appeals the district court's order accepting the recommendation of the magistrate judge and affirming the final decision of the Commissioner of the Social Security Administration that he was no longer disabled, as defined within Title II of the Social Security Act, 42 U.S.C.A. § 401-433 (West 2003 & Supp.2004). We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the district court. See Horton v. Barnhart, No. CA-03-669-0-17BD (D.S.C. Apr. 1, 2004). 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