“[A]n ALJ has wide discretion to weigh the claimant’s subjective complaints, and may discount them where they are unsupported by other relevant evidence.”
How later courts described this case
- “[A]n ALJ has wide discretion to weigh the claimant’s subjective complaints, and may discount them where they are unsupported by other relevant evidence.”
Written by the judges who cited it.
The opinion
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 17-1979
RAYMOND BROWN,
Plaintiff - Appellant,
v.
UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, United States Parole
Commission; COURT SERVICES AND COMMUNITY SUPERVISION
AGENCY (CSOSA),
Defendants - Appellees.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at Greenbelt.
Peter J. Messitte, Senior District Judge. (8:16-cv-03541-PJM)
Submitted: January 30, 2018 Decided: February 1, 2018
Before MOTZ and KEENAN, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge.
Affirmed as modified by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Raymond L. Brown, Appellant Pro Se. Vickie Elaine LeDuc, OFFICE OF THE
UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Baltimore, Maryland, for Appellees.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
Raymond Brown appeals the district court’s order dismissing his complaint. We
have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. The district court properly
concluded that it lacked subject matter jurisdiction over Brown’s claims. Accordingly,
we affirm the district court’s dismissal, see Brown v. U.S. Dep’t of Justice, No. 8:16-cv-
03541-PJM (D. Md. July 25, 2017), but we modify the dismissal to be without prejudice
and affirm the dismissal as modified, 28 U.S.C. § 2106 (2012). 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 AS MODIFIED
2