Kalfountzos v. United States of America Railroad Retirement Board

Good Law
427 F. App'x 612
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitApril 20, 201109-72253California235 words

Opinion

Opinion

MEMORANDUM

Nikiforos P. Kalfountzos petitions pro se for review of the Railroad Retirement Board’s (“Board”) decision affirming the hearing officer’s denial of his application for a disability annuity under the Railroad Retirement Act. We have jurisdiction under 45 U.S.C. § 231g, which incorporates 45 U.S.C. § 355 (f). We deny the petition for review.

We uphold the Board’s decision because it “ ‘is supported by substantial evidence, is not arbitrary and has a reasonable basis in the law.’ ” Calderon v. U.S. R.R. Ret. Bd., 780 F.2d 812, 813 (9th Cir.1986) (citation omitted); see also 45 U.S.C. § 231 (a)(1) (defining “employer”); id. § 231(f)(1) (defining “years of service”); id. § 231a (setting forth required years of service for annuity eligibility).

Kalfountzos’s remaining contentions, including his equal protection challenge, are unpersuasive. See U.S. R.R. Ret. Bd. v. Fritz, 449 U.S. 166, 174-179 , 101 S.Ct. 453 , 66 L.Ed.2d 368 (1981) (rejecting plaintiffs’ equal protection challenge to Railroad Retirement Act under the rational basis test).

We do not consider contentions that Kalfountzos did not raise before the Board. See Barron v. Ashcroft, 358 F.3d 674, 677 (9th…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.