eLaws | Code of Federal Regulations | United States Code |
 All Courts
 Federal Courts
 US Court of Appeals Cases
 Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
 2023-06

Brody Mining, LLC v. Kenneth Lamb ( 2023 )


Menu:
 
  • USCA4 Appeal: 21-1938      Doc: 49         Filed: 06/29/2023    Pg: 1 of 2
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 21-1938
BRODY MINING, LLC, c/o Encova Insurance,
Petitioner,
v.
KENNETH C. LAMB; DIRECTOR, OFFICE OF WORKERS’ COMPENSATION
PROGRAMS, UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF LABOR,
Respondents.
On Petition for Review of An Order of the Benefits Review Board. (2020-0155-BLA)
Submitted: May 31, 2023                                           Decided: June 29, 2023
Before THACKER, Circuit Judge, and MOTZ and KEENAN, Senior Circuit Judges.
Petition denied by unpublished per curiam opinion.
William S. Mattingly, JACKSON KELLY PLLC, Lexington, Kentucky, for Petitioner.
Brad A. Austin, WOLFE WILLIAMS & REYNOLDS, Norton, Virginia, for Respondents.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
USCA4 Appeal: 21-1938      Doc: 49         Filed: 06/29/2023     Pg: 2 of 2
PER CURIAM:
Brody Mining, LLC, petitions for review of the Benefits Review Board’s (BRB)
decision and order affirming the Administrative Law Judge’s (ALJ) award of black lung
benefits pursuant to
    30 U.S.C. §§ 901-944
    . Our review of the BRB’s decision is limited to
considering “whether substantial evidence supports the factual findings of the ALJ and
whether the legal conclusions of the [BRB] and ALJ are rational and consistent with
applicable law.” Westmoreland Coal Co. v. Stallard,
    876 F.3d 663
    , 668 (4th Cir. 2017)
(internal quotation marks omitted). “Substantial evidence is more than a mere scintilla. It
means such relevant evidence as a reasonable mind might accept as adequate to support a
conclusion.” Sea “B” Mining Co. v. Addison,
    831 F.3d 244
    , 252 (4th Cir. 2016) (internal
quotation marks omitted). “To determine whether this standard has been met, we consider
whether all of the relevant evidence has been analyzed and whether the ALJ has sufficiently
explained [her] rationale in crediting certain evidence.” Hobet Mining, LLC v. Epling,
    783 F.3d 498
    , 504 (4th Cir. 2015) (internal quotation marks omitted).
Our review of the record discloses that the BRB’s decision is based upon substantial
evidence and is without reversible error. Accordingly, we deny the petition for review.
Brody Mining, LLC v. Kenneth Lamb, No. 2020-0155-BLA (BRB June 30, 2021). 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
2