Meredith v. Apfel ( 1999 )

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT
No. 99-50213
Summary Calendar
BOBBIE JO MEREDITH,
Plaintiff-Appellant,
versus
KENNETH S. APFEL,
COMMISSIONER OF SOCIAL SECURITY,
Defendant-Appellee.
- - - - - - - - - -
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Western District of Texas
USDC No. 1:98-CV-458
- - - - - - - - - -
November 1, 1999
Before HIGGINBOTHAM, DeMOSS, and STEWART, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:*
Bobbie Jo Meredith appeals from the magistrate judge’s
judgment affirming the denial of her application for supplemental
security income. She argues that substantial evidence did not
exist to support the Commissioner’s decision that she could do
other work because such decision was not based on a consideration
of the combined effect of her impairments. She argues that the
ALJ failed to consider the combined effect of her (1) inability
to sit or stand for more than four hours per day; (2) her vision
*
Pursuant to 5TH CIR. R. 47.5, the court has determined
that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent
except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR.
R. 47.5.4.
No. 99-50213
- 2 -
problems; and (3) her pain and her necessity to perform various
treatments to relieve such pain.
Substantial evidence existed to support the finding that
Meredith was not disabled. See Ripley v. Chater, 67 F.3d 552,
555 (5th Cir. 1995); Moore v. Sullivan, 919 F.2d 901, 905 (5th
Cir. 1990). The magistrate judge did not fail to consider the
combined effect of Meredith’s exertional and nonexertional
impairments. See Fraga v. Bowen, 810 F.2d 1296, 1305 (5th Cir.
1987).
AFFIRMED.