Filed: Jan. 12, 2000
Latest Update: Mar. 02, 2020
Summary: IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT _ No. 99-40546 Summary Calendar _ BARBARA STEVENS, Plaintiff-Appellant, versus KENNETH S. APFEL, Commissioner of Social Security, Defendant-Appellee. _ Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas USDC No. V-98-CV-10 _ January 12, 2000 Before JOLLY, JONES, and BENAVIDES, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM:* Barbara Stevens appeals from the grant of summary judgment for the Commissioner of Social Security in he
Summary: IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT _ No. 99-40546 Summary Calendar _ BARBARA STEVENS, Plaintiff-Appellant, versus KENNETH S. APFEL, Commissioner of Social Security, Defendant-Appellee. _ Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas USDC No. V-98-CV-10 _ January 12, 2000 Before JOLLY, JONES, and BENAVIDES, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM:* Barbara Stevens appeals from the grant of summary judgment for the Commissioner of Social Security in her..
More
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT
_____________________
No. 99-40546
Summary Calendar
_____________________
BARBARA STEVENS,
Plaintiff-Appellant,
versus
KENNETH S. APFEL, Commissioner of Social Security,
Defendant-Appellee.
_________________________________________________________________
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Southern District of Texas
USDC No. V-98-CV-10
_________________________________________________________________
January 12, 2000
Before JOLLY, JONES, and BENAVIDES, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:*
Barbara Stevens appeals from the grant of summary judgment for
the Commissioner of Social Security in her disability action. She
contends that the Commissioner applied erroneous legal standards to
her claim by making a flawed credibility assessment because the
Commissioner failed to remand her claim to the administrative law
judge (“ALJ”) based on the new evidence Stevens presented to the
Appeals Council, evidence Stevens contends supported her pain
complaints. She argues that the ALJ’s assessment of her residual
functional capacity was defective because it assumed a lesser
*
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this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except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.
degree of pain than that which would follow from a diagnosis of
fibromyalgia, a diagnosis that was made after the hearing.
The ALJ’s finding that Stevens was able to return to her past
relevant work by January 1990 is supported by substantial evidence
in the record. Anthony v. Sullivan,
954 F.2d 289, 292 (5th Cir.
1992). Stevens should have filed her application for disability
benefits by January 1991 to obtain benefits for the disability that
ended in January 1990. 20 C.F.R. § 404.320(b)(3). Her November 7,
1994 application was untimely. Stevens was not insured for any
disability that began after December 1989; the Commissioner need
not have considered any evidence relevant to any such disability.
20 C.F.R. § 404.320(b)(2).
A F F I R M E D.
2