Court Opinion

ID: 9939366
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2024-02-09 21:00:38.871152+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T13:40:59.531722
License: Public Domain

USCA4 Appeal: 22-2080      Doc: 18         Filed: 02/08/2024    Pg: 1 of 3

                                            UNPUBLISHED

                               UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
                                   FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

                                              No. 22-2080

        WOODSON T. DRUMHELLER,

                            Plaintiff - Appellant,

                     v.

        KILOLO KIJAKAZI, Acting Commissioner of the Social Security Administration,

                            Defendant - Appellee.

        Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at
        Richmond. David J. Novak, District Judge. (3:21-cv-00565-DJN)

        Submitted: January 11, 2024                                       Decided: February 8, 2024

        Before THACKER and QUATTLEBAUM, Circuit Judges, and TRAXLER, Senior Circuit
        Judge.

        Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

        Woodson T. Drumheller, Appellant Pro Se.

        Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
USCA4 Appeal: 22-2080       Doc: 18         Filed: 02/08/2024     Pg: 2 of 3

        PER CURIAM:

               Woodson T. Drumheller appeals the district court’s order granting summary

        judgment to the Acting Commissioner of the Social Security Administration (SSA) and

        denying Drumheller’s cross-motion for summary judgment on his claims related to the

        SSA’s decision to disqualify Drumheller, a suspended and disbarred former attorney, from

        representing claimants before the agency. We have reviewed the record and discern no

        reversible error.

               First, we agree with the district court that Drumheller’s claims related to the alleged

        bias of the administrative law judge (ALJ) necessarily fail because Drumheller pointed to

        no instances of the ALJ’s bias beyond adverse judicial rulings, which “almost never

        constitute a valid basis for a bias or partiality motion.” See Liteky v. United States, 510

        U.S. 540, 555 (1994). We further discern no error in the district court’s rejection of

        Drumheller’s equal protection claim: Drumheller failed to show that he was treated

        differently from similarly situated individuals, given that his status as a disbarred attorney

        rendered him dissimilar from non-attorney representatives who had not been declared unfit

        to practice law based on a finding of misconduct. See Fauconier v. Clarke, 966 F.3d 265,

        277 (4th Cir. 2020). Next, we agree with the district court that the SSA properly exercised

        the discretion delegated to it by Congress in promulgating regulations under the Social

        Security Act, given the several ways in which it could exercise that discretion. Finally, we

        find no merit in Drumheller’s contentions that the SSA’s actions and decision were

        arbitrary and capricious under the Administrative Procedure Act. See 5 U.S.C. § 706(2).

                                                      2
USCA4 Appeal: 22-2080      Doc: 18        Filed: 02/08/2024     Pg: 3 of 3

               Accordingly, we affirm. See Drumheller v. Kijakazi, No. 3:21-cv-00565-DJN (E.D.

        Va. Sept. 13, 2022).     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.

                                                                                     AFFIRMED

                                                    3