Owens v. Apfel, Commissioner, 4th Cir. (1999)
Owens v. Apfel, Commissioner, 4th Cir. (1999)
We have reviewed the record, briefs, and pertinent case law in this
matter. Our review persuades us that the magistrate judge correctly
found that the Commissioner's decision denying benefits is based on
substantial evidence. Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the
magistrate judge. See Owens v. Apfel, No. CA-97-1922-5-21JI
(D.S.C. July 17 and Sept. 4, 1998).*
We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and
argument would not aid the decisional process.
AFFIRMED
_________________________________________________________________
*Although the district court's judgment or order is marked as "filed"
on July 17, 1998, the district court's records show that it was entered on
the docket sheet on July 20, 1998. Pursuant to Rules 58 and 79(a) of the
Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, it is the date that the judgment or order
was entered on the docket sheet that we take as the effective date of the
district court's decision. See Wilson v. Murray , 806 F.2d 1232, 1234-35
(4th Cir. 1986).
3