UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT
_____________________
No. 99-50916
Summary Calendar
_____________________
ANDREW C. ANDERSON,
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
(A-98-CV-576-JN)
_________________________________________________________________
May 2, 2000
Before SMITH, BARKSDALE, and PARKER, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:*
Andrew C. Anderson appeals the district court’s judgment for
the Commissioner in his action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 405(g) for
review of the Administrative Law Judge’s (“ALJ”) decision denying
his request for Supplemental Security Income benefits. We review
the Commissioner’s decision to determine whether it is supported by
substantial evidence in the record and whether the Commissioner
applied the proper legal standards in evaluating the evidence.
E.g., Villa v. Sullivan, 895 F.2d 1019, 1021 (5th Cir. 1990).
Notwithstanding Anderson’s contention that the ALJ
*
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this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except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.
“disregarded the great weight of objective medical evidence,”
substantial evidence in the record supports the ALJ’s finding that
Anderson had the residual functional capacity to perform medium
work. Furthermore, because the ALJ’s determination that Anderson’s
capacity for work was not compromised by nonexertional limitations
is supported by substantial evidence, the ALJ was entitled to rely
exclusively on the Medical-Vocational Guidelines. See Fraga v.
Bowen, 810 F.2d 1296, 1304 (5th Cir. 1987). Finally, Anderson’s
contention that the ALJ erred in not considering the combined
effects of his impairments is belied by the record.
AFFIRMED
2