Duke v. United States Railroad Retirement Board
── Duke v. United States Railroad Retirement Board ──
Court: Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Date: May 27, 2026
Category: General
NOT FOR PUBLICATION FILED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS MAY 27 2026
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
ANDREA DUKE, No. 25-8145
Agency No. 25-AP-0108
Petitioner, Railroad Retirement Board
v. MEMORANDUM*
UNITED STATES RAILROAD
RETIREMENT BOARD
Respondent.
On Petition for Review of an Order of the
Railroad Retirement Board
Submitted May 26, 2026**
Before: S.R. THOMAS, MILLER, and H.A. THOMAS, Circuit Judges.
Andrea Duke petitions pro se for review of the United States Railroad
Retirement Board’s decision terminating her disability annuity under the Railroad
Retirement Act (“RRA”). We have jurisdiction under 45 U.S.C. § 231g. “This
court will not set aside a decision of the Board if it is supported by substantial
*
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent
except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.
**
The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision
without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).
evidence, is not arbitrary and has a reasonable basis in law.” Calderon v. U.S. R.R.
Ret. Bd., 780 F.2d 812, 813 (9th Cir. 1986) (citation and internal quotation marks
omitted). We deny the petition for review.
Substantial evidence and governing law support the Board’s decision to
terminate Duke’s disability annuity due to her demonstrated ability to engage in
substantial gainful activity. See 45 U.S.C. § 231a(a)(1)(v) (setting forth eligibility
requirements for RRA annuities on the basis of disability); 20 C.F.R. § 220.140
(“If the claimant is able to engage in substantial gainful activity, the Board will
find that the claimant is not disabled for any regular employment . . . .”); 20 C.F.R.
§ 220.141 (defining substantial gainful activity as “work activity . . . even if . . .
done on a part-time basis . . . that the claimant does for pay or profit”); 20 C.F.R.
§ 220.176 (requiring a pre-termination determination of medical improvement only
if “the annuitant has not demonstrated the ability to engage in substantial gainful
activity”).
PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED.
2 25-8145
{# E23 (Nick, ruling section 1 answer 10): quoting a bill or a court opinion works
the way quoting a news article works. Select a passage above and the same panel
opens: the passage goes to the official you choose, with this document's own
address as its source and its own type. #}