IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT
No. 00-30247
Summary Calendar
MATILDA THOMAS,
Plaintiff-Appellant,
versus
KENNETH S. APFEL, COMMISSIONER OF SOCIAL SECURITY,
Defendant-Appellee.
- - - - - - - - - -
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Western District of Louisiana
USDC No. 98-CV-1137
- - - - - - - - - -
September 6, 2000
Before SMITH, BENAVIDES, and DENNIS, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:*
Matilda Thomas appeals the district court’s affirmance of
the Social Security Commissioner’s decision to deny her
disability insurance benefits under the Social Security Act.
Thomas argues that the district court erred in sua
sponte ruling that her current application for benefits was
barred by the res judicata doctrine, based on the Secretary’s
December 24, 1992, decision to deny her benefits with respect to
an earlier application. (Thomas’ current application concerns
the period between December 25, 1992, the alleged onset date 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that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent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.
No. 00-30247
-2-
her disability, and March 31, 1993, the date her disability
insured status expired.)
Regardless whether the district court may have erred in
relying on res judicata, this court may affirm on any basis
apparent from the record. See Sojourner T v. Edwards, 974 F.2d
27, 30 (5th Cir. 1992). Neither in her appellate brief nor in
her reply brief has Thomas argued that the Commissioner’s
determination that she was “not disabled” was unsupported by the
testimonial and medical evidence. Moreover, in her
administrative proceedings, Thomas presented no relevant or
credible medical evidence to suggest that she was disabled in the
period after December 24, 1992. The Commissioner’s determination
that Thomas was not disabled was supported by “substantial
evidence.” See Greenspan v. Shalala, 38 F.3d 232, 236 (5th Cir.
1994).
The district court’s affirmance of the Commissioner’s
decision is AFFIRMED.