Case Name: Lorraine KING, 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: 2011-10-17
Citations: 450 F. App'x 271
Docket Number: No. 11-1531
Parties: Lorraine KING, Plaintiff—Appellant, v. Michael J. ASTRUE, Commissioner of Social Security, Defendant—Appellee.
Judges: Before WILKINSON, DAVIS, and WYNN, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 450
Pages: 271–272

Head Matter:
Lorraine KING, Plaintiff—Appellant, v. Michael J. ASTRUE, Commissioner of Social Security, Defendant—Appellee.
No. 11-1531.
United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
Submitted: Sept. 27, 2011.
Decided: Oct. 17, 2011.
Lorraine King, Appellant Pro Se. Shannon G. Petty, Social Security Administration, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, for Appel-lee.
Before WILKINSON, DAVIS, and WYNN, Circuit Judges.

Opinion:
Affirmed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
Lorraine King appeals the magistrate judge's order affirming the Commissioner's decision to deny King disability and supplemental security income 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. § 405(g) (2006); Johnson v. Barnhart, 434 F.3d 650, 653 (4th Cir.2005) (per curiam). We have thoroughly reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the magistrate judge. King v. Astrue, No. 5:09-cv-01515 (S.D.W. Va. Mar. 3, 2011) & 2011 WL 2680720 (July 8, 2011). 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 the jurisdiction of the magistrate judge. See 28 U.S.C. § 636(c) (2006).