Greer v. Apfel ( 2000 )

UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
ROBERT L. GREER,
Plaintiff-Appellant,
v.
No. 99-1814
KENNETH S. APFEL, Commissioner,
Social Security Administration,
Defendant-Appellee.
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Western District of Virginia, at Roanoke.
Glen E. Conrad, Magistrate Judge.
(CA-98-585-7)
Submitted: November 30, 1999
Decided: February 8, 2000
Before WILKINS, WILLIAMS, and MICHAEL, Circuit Judges.
_________________________________________________________________
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
_________________________________________________________________
COUNSEL
Charles D. Bennett, Jr., Roanoke, Virginia, for Appellant. James A.
Winn, Chief Counsel, Region III, Patricia M. Smith, Deputy Chief
Counsel, Connie Hoffman-Healy, Assistant Regional Counsel, Office
of the General Counsel, SOCIAL SECURITY ADMINISTRATION,
Philadelphia, Pennsylvania; Robert P. Crouch, Jr., United States
Attorney, John F. Corcoran, Assistant United States Attorney, Roa-
noke, Virginia, for Appellee.
_________________________________________________________________
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See
Local Rule 36(c).
_________________________________________________________________
OPINION
PER CURIAM:
Robert L. Greer appeals from the magistrate judge's order granting
summary judgment to the Commissioner of Social Security on his
claim for certain social security disability benefits. The parties volun-
tarily consented to the jurisdiction of the magistrate judge pursuant to
28 U.S.C.A. § 636(c) (West 1993 & Supp. 1999). We have reviewed
the briefs, joint appendix, and administrative record and find no
reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm.
On appeal, Greer alleges the following: (1) the magistrate judge
erred in his determination that substantial evidence supported the
Administrative Law Judge's ("ALJ") decision that Greer was capable
of performing a full range of sedentary work at all relevant times; (2)
the ALJ improperly relied on the opinion of a non-examining physi-
cian over that of Greer's treating physicians; (3) the ALJ failed to
consider evidence of Greer's pulmonary impairment; (4) the ALJ
failed to properly evaluate his subjective complaints and erred in find-
ing that Greer was not entirely credible; (5) the ALJ erred in not
ordering a consultative evaluation to further evaluate Greer's pulmo-
nary impairment; and (6) the ALJ erred in ruling that Social Security
Ruling 83-20 and the Court's reasoning in Bailey v. Chater, 68 F.3d
75 (4th Cir. 1995), are inapplicable to this case.
Our review persuades us that the magistrate judge correctly found
that the Commissioner's decision denying benefits prior to July 2,
1995, was based on substantial evidence. See Hays v. Sullivan, 907
F.2d 1453, 1456 (4th Cir. 1990). Additionally, we find that the ALJ
properly weighed the opinions of Greer's treating physicians, see
Craig v. Chater, 76 F.3d 585, 590 (4th Cir. 1996), made a proper
credibility finding pursuant to 20 C.F.R. § 404.1529 (1999), and suffi-
ciently considered evidence of Greer's pulmonary impairment. We
further hold that the ALJ did not err in not ordering a consultative
2
evaluation to further evaluate Greer's pulmonary impairment and in
finding that Social Security Ruling 83-20 and the Court's reasoning
in Bailey v. Chater were inapplicable in this case.
Accordingly, we affirm the magistrate judge's order granting sum-
mary judgment to the Commissioner. We dispense with oral argument
because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the
materials before the court and oral argument would not aid the deci-
sional process.
AFFIRMED
3