Case Name: Lisa COHEN, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Michael J. ASTRUE, Commissioner, Social Security Administration, Defendant-Appellee
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2009-07-08
Citations: 328 F. App'x 846
Docket Number: No. 08-1893
Parties: Lisa COHEN, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Michael J. ASTRUE, Commissioner, Social Security Administration, Defendant-Appellee.
Judges: Before NIEMEYER and SHEDD, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 328
Pages: 846–846

Head Matter:
Lisa COHEN, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Michael J. ASTRUE, Commissioner, Social Security Administration, Defendant-Appellee.
No. 08-1893.
United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
Submitted: June 18, 2009.
Decided: July 8, 2009.
Bruce K. Billman, Fredericksburg, Virginia, for Appellant. Dana J. Boente, Acting United States Attorney, Leslie B. McClendon, Assistant United States Attorney, Alexandria, 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Affirmed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.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:
Lisa Cohen appeals the magistrate judge's order affirming the Commissioner's decision to deny Cohen a period of disability and disability insurance benefits. We must uphold the decision to deny benefits if the decision is supported by substantial evidence and the correct law was applied. See 42 U.S.C.A. § 405(g) (West Supp.2008); Craig v. Chater, 76 F.3d 585, 589 (4th Cir.1996). We have thoroughly reviewed the parties' briefs, administrative record, and the materials submitted in the joint appendix, and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm. See Cohen v. Astrue, No. 1:07-cv-00984-BRP (E.D. Va. filed June 11, 2008; , entered June 12, 2008). 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
The parties consented to proceed before a magistrate judge pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(c) (2006).