Filed: Aug. 02, 2001
Latest Update: Mar. 02, 2020
Summary: IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT No. 00-31414 Summary Calendar JONATHAN BURAS, Plaintiff-Appellant, versus LARRY G. MASSANARI, ACTING COMMISSIONER OF SOCIAL SECURITY, Defendant-Appellee. - Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Louisiana USDC No. 00-CV-654-N - July 31, 2001 Before EMILIO M. GARZA, STEWART and PARKER, Circuit Judges: PER CURIAM:* Jonathan Buras appeals the district court’s judgment affirming the Social Security Commissi
Summary: IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT No. 00-31414 Summary Calendar JONATHAN BURAS, Plaintiff-Appellant, versus LARRY G. MASSANARI, ACTING COMMISSIONER OF SOCIAL SECURITY, Defendant-Appellee. - Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Louisiana USDC No. 00-CV-654-N - July 31, 2001 Before EMILIO M. GARZA, STEWART and PARKER, Circuit Judges: PER CURIAM:* Jonathan Buras appeals the district court’s judgment affirming the Social Security Commissio..
More
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT
No. 00-31414
Summary Calendar
JONATHAN BURAS,
Plaintiff-Appellant,
versus
LARRY G. MASSANARI,
ACTING COMMISSIONER OF SOCIAL SECURITY,
Defendant-Appellee.
-------------------------------------------------------
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Eastern District of Louisiana
USDC No. 00-CV-654-N
-------------------------------------------------------
July 31, 2001
Before EMILIO M. GARZA, STEWART and PARKER, Circuit Judges:
PER CURIAM:*
Jonathan Buras appeals the district court’s judgment affirming the Social Security
Commissioner’s denial of disability benefits. Buras, relying on this court’s decision in Singletary v.
Bowen,
798 F.2d 818 (5th Cir. 1986), contends that the Administrative Law Judge (ALJ) erred in
failing to consider whether he could obtain and maintain employment. To the extent that Singletary
is applicable to Buras’s case, he has not shown that the ALJ’s failure to consider whether he could
maintain employment is reversible error. He does not argue, and the medical evidence does not
indicate, that his physical impairment prevented him from maintaining regular employment. See
*
Pursuant to 5th Cir. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be
published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5th Cir.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.
Singletary, 798 F.2d at 822 (determination that claimant is unable to continue working for significant
periods of time must be supported by medical evidence). Accordingly, the district court’s judgment
upholding the Commissioner’s decision denying benefits is AFFIRMED.