F I L E D
United States Court of Appeals
Tenth Circuit
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
DEC 9 2002
FOR THE TENTH CIRCUIT
PATRICK FISHER
Clerk
DEBORAH BUSTAMANTE,
Plaintiff - Appellant,
v. No. 02-2044
D.C. No. CIV-00-274 JP/JHG
JO ANNE B. BARNHART, (D. New Mexico)
Commissioner, Social Security
Administration,
Defendant - Appellee.
ORDER AND JUDGMENT *
Before SEYMOUR , EBEL , and O’BRIEN , Circuit Judges.
After examining the briefs and appellate record, this panel has determined
unanimously to grant the parties’ request for a decision on the briefs without oral
argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(f); 10th Cir. R. 34.1(G). The case is therefore
ordered submitted without oral argument.
*
This order and judgment is not binding precedent, except under the
doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, and collateral estoppel. The court
generally disfavors the citation of orders and judgments; nevertheless, an order
and judgment may be cited under the terms and conditions of 10th Cir. R. 36.3.
Plaintiff-appellant Deborah Bustamante appeals from an order of the
district court affirming the Commissioner’s decision denying her application for
Social Security disability and Supplemental Security Income benefits (SSI).
Ms. Bustamante alleges disability based on back problems requiring five previous
back surgeries, together with hip and buttock pain. The agency denied her
applications initially and on reconsideration.
Ms. Bustamante received a de novo hearing before an administrative law
judge (ALJ). The ALJ determined that appellant retained the residual functional
capacity (RFC) to perform her past relevant work as an accounting clerk. The
Appeals Council denied review, making the ALJ’s decision the Commissioner’s
final decision.
We review the Commissioner’s decision to determine whether the factual
findings are supported by substantial evidence in the record and whether the
correct legal standards were applied. See Andrade v. Sec’y of Health & Human
Servs., 985 F.2d 1045, 1047 (10th Cir. 1993). Substantial evidence is “such
relevant evidence as a reasonable mind might accept as adequate to support a
conclusion.” Fowler v. Bowen, 876 F.2d 1451, 1453 (10th Cir. 1989) (quotations
omitted).
The Commissioner follows a five-step sequential evaluation process
to determine whether a claimant is disabled. See Williams v. Bowen, 844 F.2d
-2-
748, 750-52 (10th Cir. 1988). The claimant bears the burden of establishing
a prima facie case of disability at steps one through four. See id. at 751 n.2. The
ALJ denied Ms. Bustamante’s claim at step four, finding that she could return to
her past relevant work.
On appeal, Ms. Bustamante raises three issues. She contends that her back
problems are sufficiently severe to meet the listing for vertebrogenic disorders.
She argues that the ALJ improperly rejected her complaint of disabling pain as
not credible. Finally, she contends that the ALJ’s finding that she could perform
her past relevant work lacks substantial evidence in the record.
Upon careful consideration of the record and applicable law under the
above-described standards, Ms. Bustamante fails to show error requiring reversal.
The judgment of the United States District Court for the District of New Mexico
is therefore AFFIRMED for substantially the same reasons articulated in the
magistrate judge’s report and recommendation dated November 30, 2001, and
adopted by the district court.
Entered for the Court
Stephanie K. Seymour
Circuit Judge
-3-