UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FIFTH CIRCUIT
_________________
No. 98-50148
Summary Calendar
_________________
SIDNEY MCGARITY,
Plaintiff - Appellant,
versus
KENNETH S. APPEL, COMMISSIONER OF SOCIAL
SECURITY,
Defendant - Appellee.
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Western District of Texas
(SA-96-CV-1205)
February 12, 1999
Before EMILIO M. GARZA, DeMOSS, and BENAVIDES, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:*
Sidney McGarity appeals the district court’s judgment
affirming the Social Security Commissioner’s denial of disability
insurance benefits and supplemental security income. McGarity
maintains that the Administrative Law Judge’s hypothetical question
to the vocational expert excluded his depression and poor prognosis
for rehabilitation. He argues that this omission rendered the
hypothetical question violative of Social Security Ruling 96-8p.
We review McGarity’s claim under the plain error standard
*
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opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited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.
because he did not present it in district court. See Crawford v.
Falcon Drilling Co., 131 F.3d 1120, 1123 (5th Cir. 1997); Douglass
v. United Servs. Auto. Ass’n, 79 F.3d 1415, 1428 (5th Cir. 1996)
(en banc). We find plain error only if (1) there was an error (2)
that was clear and obvious, and (3) that affected substantial
rights. See United States v. Munoz, 150 F.3d 401, 413 (5th Cir.
1998). Even if we find plain error, we reverse only if the plain
error seriously affected the fairness, integrity or public
reputation of judicial proceedings. See id.
We are unpersuaded that we must reverse for plain error.
Accordingly, the district court’s judgment is AFFIRMED.
-2-