OWENS v. SAUL (2019)

Robert Lamar Owens, Jr., appeals the magistrate judge’s order denying Owens’ motion to remand and upholding the Administrative Law Judge’s denial of Owens’ applications for disability insurance benefits and supplemental security income.^* On appeal, Owens disputes only the decision not to remand to the agency for consideration of new evidence. See 42 U.S.C. § 405(g) (2012). However, we have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. See Borders v. Heckler, 777 F.2d 954, 955 (4th Cir. 1985) (identifying four prerequisites for remand motion). Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the magistrate judge. Owens v. Berryhill, No. 1:17-cv-00107-DLH, 2018 WL 3620495 (W.D.N.C. July 30, 2018). 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.   The parties consented to the magistrate judge’s jurisdiction. See 28 U.S.C. § 636(c) (2012).

PER CURIAM:

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.