Case Name: Edsil B. KEENER, Executor for Estate of Shirley Keener, on behalf of Shirley Keener, Deceased Survivor of Edsil Keener and on behalf of Edsil Keener, Deceased Miner, Petitioner, v. DIRECTOR, OFFICE OF WORKERS' COMPENSATION PROGRAMS; Peerless Eagle Coal Company, Respondents
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2010-03-29
Citations: 372 F. App'x 399
Docket Number: No. 09-1984
Parties: Edsil B. KEENER, Executor for Estate of Shirley Keener, on behalf of Shirley Keener, Deceased Survivor of Edsil Keener and on behalf of Edsil Keener, Deceased Miner, Petitioner, v. DIRECTOR, OFFICE OF WORKERS’ COMPENSATION PROGRAMS; Peerless Eagle Coal Company, Respondents.
Judges: Before GREGORY, SHEDD, and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 372
Pages: 399–400

Head Matter:
Edsil B. KEENER, Executor for Estate of Shirley Keener, on behalf of Shirley Keener, Deceased Survivor of Edsil Keener and on behalf of Edsil Keener, Deceased Miner, Petitioner, v. DIRECTOR, OFFICE OF WORKERS’ COMPENSATION PROGRAMS; Peerless Eagle Coal Company, Respondents.
No. 09-1984.
United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
Submitted: March 10, 2010.
Decided: March 29, 2010.
John Cline, Piney View, West Virginia, for Petitioner. Douglas A. Smoot, Kathy L. Snyder, Jackson Kelly PLLC, Morgan-town, West Virginia, for Respondent Peerless Eagle Coal Company.
Before GREGORY, SHEDD, and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges.

Opinion:
Petition denied by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
Edsil B. Keener seeks review of the Benefits Review Board's decision and order affirming the administrative law judge's denial of black lung benefits pursuant to 30 U.S.C. § 901-945 (2006). Our review of the record discloses that the Board's decision is based upon substantial evidence and is without reversible error. Accordingly, we deny the petition for review for the reasons stated by the Board. Keener v. DOWCP, No. 08-0261-BLA (B.R.B. Nov. 25, 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.
PETITION DENIED.