Learn About the Law
Get help with your legal needs
FindLaw’s Learn About the Law features thousands of informational articles to help you understand your options. And if you’re ready to hire an attorney, find one in your area who can help.
NICHOLAS JAREK, Plaintiff – Appellant, v. CAROLYN W. COLVIN, Commissioner of Social Security Administration, Defendant - Appellee.
Nicholas Jarek appeals the district court's order adopting the magistrate judge's recommendation and upholding the Commissioner's denial of Jarek's applications for disability benefits and supplemental security income. Our review of the Commissioner's determination is limited to evaluating whether the findings are supported by substantial evidence and whether the correct law was applied. See Mascio v. Colvin, 780 F.3d 632, 634 (4th Cir. 2015).
We have thoroughly reviewed the parties' briefs, the administrative record, and the joint appendix, and we discern no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm the district court's judgment.* Jarek v. Colvin, No. 3:14-cv-00620-FDW-DSC (W.D.N.C. Feb. 16, 2016). 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
FOOTNOTES
FOOTNOTE. We note that, while the treatment records and opinion letter from Jarek's pain management specialist may have related to the relevant period considered by the ALJ, this evidence does not warrant remand. Furthermore, we conclude that the evidence submitted to the district court in support of a sentence six remand under 42 U.S.C. § 405(g) (2012) either does not relate to the relevant period or is not material. See Meyer v. Astrue, 662 F.3d 700, 705 (4th Cir. 2011) (recognizing that evidence “is material if there is a reasonable possibility that the new evidence would have changed the outcome” (internal quotation marks omitted)).
PER CURIAM:
A free source of state and federal court opinions, state laws, and the United States Code. For more information about the legal concepts addressed by these cases and statutes visit FindLaw's Learn About the Law.
Docket No: No. 16-1388
Decided: January 13, 2017
Court: United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
Search our directory by legal issue
Enter information in one or both fields (Required)
Harness the power of our directory with your own profile. Select the button below to sign up.
FindLaw for Legal Professionals
Learn more about FindLaw’s newsletters, including our terms of use and privacy policy. This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
Get help with your legal needs
FindLaw’s Learn About the Law features thousands of informational articles to help you understand your options. And if you’re ready to hire an attorney, find one in your area who can help.
Search our directory by legal issue
Enter information in one or both fields (Required)