USCA4 Appeal: 20-1126 Doc: 29 Filed: 08/07/2023 Pg: 1 of 2

UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 20-1126

REBECCA J. RILEY, Petitioner, v. ISLAND CREEK COAL COMPANY, c/o WELLS FARGO DISABILITY MGT.; DIRECTOR, OFFICE OF WORKERS’ COMPENSATION PROGRAMS, UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF LABOR, Respondents.

On Petition for Review of an Order of the Benefits Review Board. (18-0375 BLA)

Submitted: April 3, 2023 Decided: August 7, 2023

Before AGEE, THACKER, and RUSHING, Circuit Judges.

Petition denied by unpublished per curiam opinion.

ON BRIEF: Timothy C. MacDonnell, Caroline Crosby, Jesse Hamrick, Black Lung Legal Clinic, WASHINGTON AND LEE UNIVERSITY SCHOOL OF LAW, Lexington, Virginia, for Petitioner. Jeffrey R. Soukup, William S. Mattingly, JACKSON KELLY PLLC, Lexington, Kentucky, for Respondent Island Creek Coal Company.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

USCA4 Appeal: 20-1126 Doc: 29 Filed: 08/07/2023 Pg: 2 of 2

PER CURIAM: Rebecca J. Riley petitions for review of the Benefits Review Board’s (BRB) decision and order affirming the Administrative Law Judge’s (ALJ) decision on remand to deny, on reconsideration, her claim for 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 for the reasons stated by the BRB. Riley v. Island Creek Coal Co., No. 18-0375 BLA (B.R.B.

Dec. 19, 2019). 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