United States Court of Appeals
Fifth Circuit
F I L E D
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
May 30, 2003
FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT
Charles R. Fulbruge III
Clerk
No. 02-61038
Summary Calendar
TYREE W. BROWN,
Plaintiff-Appellant,
versus
JO ANNE B. BARNHART,
COMMISSIONER OF SOCIAL SECURITY,
Defendant-Appellee.
--------------------
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Southern District of Mississippi
USDC No. 1:01-CV-323
--------------------
Before HIGGINBOTHAM, SMITH, and CLEMENT, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:*
Tyree W. Brown appeals the district court’s judgment that
affirmed the decision of the Commissioner of Social Security
denying disability benefits. Brown does not assert that the
Commissioner applied incorrect legal standards or that the record
lacks substantial evidence to support the Commissioner’s decision
to deny benefits. Brown does not challenge any specific finding
by the Administrative Law Judge (“ALJ”) concerning his ailments,
*
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that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent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. 02-61038
-2-
his credibility, his residual functional capacity, or his ability
to perform work.
Our review is limited to determining whether the
Commissioner applied the proper legal standards and whether the
decision is supported by substantial evidence on the record as a
whole. Anthony v. Sullivan, 954 F.2d 289, 292 (5th Cir. 1992).
Substantial evidence is such relevant evidence as a reasonable
mind might accept as adequate to support a conclusion. Villa v.
Sullivan, 895 F.2d 1019, 1021-22 (5th Cir. 1990). We may not
reweigh the evidence or try the issues de novo. Id. at 1022.
The record shows that the ALJ applied the proper legal standards
and that the Commissioner’s decision is supported by substantial
evidence. Anthony, 954 F.2d at 292.
Brown asserts that on October 17, 2000, he satisfied the
criteria for a listed mental impairment. The record is devoid of
evidence that Brown met a listed mental impairment.
Brown contends that the ALJ erred when he considered the
report of clinical psychologist J.D. Matherne. Brown argues that
his ailments are psychiatric in nature and that Matherne was
acting beyond the scope of his area of expertise.
A claimant must establish medical evidence of a medical
impairment through reports of clinical signs, symptoms and/or
laboratory or psychological test findings. 20 C.F.R. Pt. 220,
App. 1, § 12.00B. Such documentation may be obtained from
evaluations made by a psychiatrist or a psychologist. Id.
No. 02-61038
-3-
Brown contends that the Appeals Council erred when it
determined that additional medical evidence submitted by Brown
did not provide grounds for a reversal of the ALJ’s decision.
Brown does not explain how these reports substantiate his claims
that he suffered from a disability during the pertinent period.
A review of the reports does not provide any support for Brown’s
claims. Brown has not shown error in the Appeals Council’s
conclusion.
Brown argues that he is entitled to retroactive benefits
because the Commissioner subsequently found him disabled based on
evidence that was the same as or similar to the evidence that
Brown provided with his previous disability application. Brown
does not offer any evidence that the current disability did not
result from deterioration of a condition that was not previously
disabling. Leggett v. Chater, 67 F.3d 558, 567 (5th Cir. 1995).
The record does not include any documentation concerning the
reason for the subsequent grant of benefits, and Brown’s brief is
devoid of any such information. Accordingly, the judgment of the
district court is AFFIRMED.