Camp v. Massanari, Acting , 22 F. App'x 311 ( 2001 )


Menu:
  •                               UNPUBLISHED
    UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
    FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
    No. 01-1924
    JANICE CAMP,
    Plaintiff - Appellant,
    versus
    LARRY G. MASSANARI, ACTING COMMISSIONER OF
    SOCIAL SECURITY ADMINISTRATION,
    Defendant - Appellee.
    Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western Dis-
    trict of North Carolina, at Asheville. Max O. Cogburn, Magistrate
    Judge. (CA-00-186-1-C)
    Submitted:     December 20, 2001         Decided:    December 27, 2001
    Before LUTTIG, TRAXLER, and GREGORY, Circuit Judges.
    Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
    Jimmy A. Pettus, H. RUSSELL VICK & ASSOCIATES, P.L.L.C., Greens-
    boro, North Carolina, for Appellant. Robert J. Conrad, Jr., United
    States Attorney, Richard Lee Edwards, Assistant United States
    Attorney, Asheville, North Carolina, for Appellee.
    Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
    See Local Rule 36(c).
    PER CURIAM:
    Janice Camp appeals from the district court’s* order affirming
    the Commissioner’s final decision to deny Camp’s application for
    Social Security disability benefits. Our review of the record dis-
    closes that the Commissioner’s decision is based upon substantial
    evidence and is without reversible error.   Accordingly, we affirm
    substantially on the reasoning of the district court.      Camp v.
    Massanari, No. CA-00-186-1-C (W.D.N.C. May 15, 2001).    Addition-
    ally, although Camp argues that the Administrative Law Judge
    (“ALJ”) rejected Dr. Richard Munschy’s opinion without properly
    seeking additional information from the doctor, she has made no
    showing of prejudice.   Thus, any error on the part of the ALJ was
    harmless.   See Newton v. Apfel, 
    209 F.3d 448
    , 458 (5th Cir. 2000)
    (holding claim requires showing that additional evidence would have
    been produced that might have led to a different decision).     We
    dispense with oral argument, because the facts and legal conten-
    tions are adequately presented in the materials before the court
    and argument would not aid the decisional process.
    AFFIRMED
    *
    The case was decided by a magistrate judge upon the consent
    of both parties.
    2
    

Document Info

Docket Number: 01-1924

Citation Numbers: 22 F. App'x 311

Judges: Gregory, Luttig, Per Curiam, Traxler

Filed Date: 12/27/2001

Precedential Status: Non-Precedential

Modified Date: 8/6/2023