UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
For the Fifth Circuit
No. 97-50360
Summary Calendar
THRESSA A. TERRY,
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. A-95-CV-287)
January 9, 1998
Before DUHÉ, DeMOSS, and DENNIS, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM*:
Thressa A. Terry appeals the district court’s judgment
affirming the Social Security Commissioner’s denial of supplemental
security benefits and disability insurance benefits to Terry.
Terry argues that the Administrative Law Judge (ALJ) erred in his
determination that she was not disabled because she was able to
perform the duties of her past relevant work as a gift shop manager
and cashier. She contends that the ALJ failed to consider all of
*
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this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except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.
her impairments and relied on the medical opinion of one doctor to
the exclusion of all others. After thoroughly reviewing the
record, we find that Terry’s assertions lack merit and that the
ALJ’s findings are supported by substantial evidence.
Terry argues that the district court erred in failing to
remand to the Commissioner for consideration of a report by
psychologist George Parker, Ph.D., who opined that Terry was
unable to perform any substantial gainful activity because of her
physical impairments, pain, and depression. The district court did
not err because Terry failed to show good cause for her failure to
submit the evidence earlier. See 42 U.S.C. § 405(g); Ripley v.
Chater, 67 F.3d 552, 555 (5th Cir. 1995).
Terry also argues that she was disabled due to her age and
because she could no longer perform the math skills required of a
cashier. Terry failed to raise these issues in her appeal to the
Appeals Council. This court has jurisdiction to review the
Commissioner’s final decision only when a claimant has exhausted
her administrative remedies. Paul v. Shalala, 29 F.3d 208, 210
(5th. Cir. 1994). Terry’s failure to raise these issues before the
Appeals Council deprives this court of jurisdiction to review them.
See id. These claims are dismissed for want of jurisdiction
AFFIRMED IN PART; DISMISSED IN PART.
2