Case Name: Palmer BALTHIS, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Larry G. MASSANARI, Acting Commissioner of Social Security Administration, Defendant-Appellee
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2001-09-21
Citations: 19 F. App'x 89
Docket Number: No. 01-1362
Parties: Palmer BALTHIS, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Larry G. MASSANARI, Acting Commissioner of Social Security Administration, Defendant-Appellee.
Judges: Before WILLIAMS, TRAXLER, and GREGORY, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 19
Pages: 89–90

Head Matter:
Palmer BALTHIS, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Larry G. MASSANARI, Acting Commissioner of Social Security Administration, Defendant-Appellee.
No. 01-1362.
United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
Submitted Sept. 10, 2001.
Decided Sept. 21, 2001.
Roger W. Rutherford, Erick A. Bowman, Wolfe & Farmer, Norton, VA, for appellant. James A. Winn, Regional Chief, Region III, Patricia M. Smith, Deputy Chief, Taryn Goldstein, Assistant Regional, Office of the General, Social Security Administration, Philadelphia, PA; Ruth E. Plagenhoef, United States Attorney, John F. Corcoran, Assistant United States Attorney, United States Attorney’s Office, Roanoke, VA, for appellee.
Before WILLIAMS, TRAXLER, and GREGORY, Circuit Judges.

Opinion:
PER CURIAM.
Palmer Balthis appeals the district court's order granting summary judgment in favor of the Commissioner of Social Security in Balthis's action for disability insurance benefits under Title II of the Social Security Act, 42 U.S.C.A. § 401-433 (West Supp.2001). Balthis worked in the coal mining industry until June 21, 1996, when he stopped working because of heart problems, back pain and hearing loss. This court must uphold the denial of benefits if the decision is supported by substantial evidence and the correct legal standard was applied. See 42 U.S.C.A. § 405(g); Craig v. Chater, 76 F.3d 585, 589 (4th Cir.1996). We have reviewed the entire administrative record, including additional evidence submitted to the Appeals Council, and find substantial evidence supports the Administrative Law Judge's determination that Balthis was able to return to his past relevant work. Therefore, we affirm on the reasoning of the district court. Balthis v. Massanari, No. CA-00-34-2 (W.D.Va. Feb. 14, 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.