Case Name: Clifton P. PENNINGTON, Jr., 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: 2001-06-28
Citations: 13 F. App'x 110
Docket Number: No. 01-1096
Parties: Clifton P. PENNINGTON, Jr., Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Larry G. MASSANARI, Acting Commissioner of Social Security Administration, Defendant-appellee.
Judges: Before WIDENER, NIEMEYER, and GREGORY, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 13
Pages: 110–110

Head Matter:
Clifton P. PENNINGTON, Jr., Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Larry G. MASSANARI, Acting Commissioner of Social Security Administration, Defendant-appellee.
No. 01-1096.
United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
Submitted June 8, 2001.
Decided June 28, 2001.
Erick A. Bowman, Wolfe & Farmer, Norton, VA, for appellant. James A. Winn, Regional Chief Counsel, Region III, Patricia M. Smith, Deputy Chief Counsel, Mona M. Bennett, Assistant Regional Counsel, Office of the General Counsel, Social Security Administration, Philadelphia, PA; Robert P. Crouch, Jr., United States Attorney, Julie C. Dudley, Assistant United States Attorney, Roanoke, VA, for appellee.
Before WIDENER, NIEMEYER, and GREGORY, Circuit Judges.

Opinion:
PER CURIAM.
Clifton Pennington appeals the district court's order upholding the Commissioner's denial of his claim for disability insurance benefits. Pennington worked in the coal mining industry until he quit on February 15, 1995, because of groin and back pain. Finding substantial evidence to support the Administrative Law Judge's determination that Pennington was physically capable of performing the full range of light work, did not suffer from a severe mental impairment, and was not disabled within the meaning of the Social Security Act, we affirm on the reasoning of the district court. See Hays v. Sullivan, 907 F.2d 1453, 1456 (4th Cir.1990). 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.