James E. Walker v. Railroad Retirement Board

46 F.3d 1149 NOTICE: Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3 provides that dispositions other than opinions or orders designated for publication are not precedential and should not be cited except when relevant under the doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, or collateral estoppel. James E. WALKER, Petitioner, v. RAILROAD RETIREMENT BOARD, Respondent. No. 93-70436. United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit. Argued and Submitted Dec. 14, 1994. Decided Dec. 30, 1994. Before: HUG, CANBY and KLEINFELD, Circuit Judges. 1 MEMORANDUM * 2 We are compelled to affirm by the limited scope of review. The only close issue is entirely factual. The Railroad Retirement Board's findings of fact are conclusive "if supported by evidence and in the absence of fraud." 45 U.S.C. Sec. 355 (f). We have construed this as a "substantial evidence" test. Calderon v. U.S. Railroad Retirement Bd., 780 F.2d 812, 813 (9th Cir.1985). We must affirm the Board's interpretation of law if it is "not arbitrary and has a reasonable basis in law." Id. 3 The Board did not abuse its discretion by refusing to reopen the 1982 case, because Mr. Walker was not eligible for retirement then. He had not yet worked 120 months for the…