Case Name: CONSOLIDATION COAL COMPANY, Petitioner, v. Fuller W. VARNER; Director, Office of Workers' Compensation Programs, United States Department of Labor, Respondents
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2015-12-17
Citations: 626 F. App'x 53
Docket Number: No. 14-1322
Parties: CONSOLIDATION COAL COMPANY, Petitioner, v. Fuller W. VARNER; Director, Office of Workers’ Compensation Programs, United States Department of Labor, Respondents.
Judges: Before WILKINSON, KEENAN, and DIAZ, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 626
Pages: 53–53

Head Matter:
CONSOLIDATION COAL COMPANY, Petitioner, v. Fuller W. VARNER; Director, Office of Workers’ Compensation Programs, United States Department of Labor, Respondents.
No. 14-1322.
United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
Submitted: Oct. 30, 2015.
Decided: Dec. 17, 2015.
William S. Mattingly, Jackson Kelly PLLC, Morgantown, West Virginia, for Petitioner. Heath M. Long, Pawlowski, Bilonick & Long, Ebensburg, Pennsylvania; M. Patricia Smith, Solicitor of Labor, Rae Ellen James, Associate Solicitor, Maia S. Fisher, Deputy Associate Solicitor, Sean G. Bajkowski, United States Department of Labor, Washington, D.C., for Respondents.
Before WILKINSON, KEENAN, and DIAZ, Circuit Judges.

Opinion:
Petition denied by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
Consolidation Coal Company seeks review of the Benefits Review Board's decision and order affirming the administrative law judge's award of black lung benefits on a claim filed by Fuller W. Varner pursuant to 30 U.S.C. § 901-945 (2012). Our review of the record discloses that the Board's decision is based upon substantial evidence and is without reversible error. Consolidation Coal Co. v. Varner, No. 13-0188-BLA (B.R.B. Feb. 5, 2014). Accordingly, we deny the petition for review. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before this court and argument would, not aid the decisional process.
PETITION DENIED.