United States Court of Appeals
Fifth Circuit
F I L E D
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS February 27, 2004
FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT
Charles R. Fulbruge III
Clerk
No. 03-40971
Summary Calendar
BARBARA HELEN METTLEN,
Plaintiff-Appellant,
versus
JO ANNE B. BARNHART COMMISSIONER OF SOCIAL SECURITY,
Defendant-Appellee.
--------------------
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Eastern District of Texas
USDC No. 9:01-CV-28
--------------------
Before DUHÉ, BENAVIDES, and STEWART, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:1
Barbara Helen Mettlen appeals the district court’s judgment
affirming a final decision of the Commissioner of Social Security.
She argues that the Social Security administrative law judge failed
to properly apply Social Security Ruling 99-2p. In order to obtain
reversal, Mettlen must show both error and some resulting
prejudice. Newton v. Apfel, 209 F.3d 448, 458 (5th Cir. 2000).
Prejudice can be established by showing that the additional
considerations “‘might have led to a different decision.’” Newton,
1
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that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent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.
209 F.3d at 458 (quoting Ripley v. Chater, 67 F.3d 552, 557 n. 22
(5th Cir. 1995)).
The administrative law judge’s conclusion that Mettlen was
still able to perform her past relevant work is supported by
substantial evidence within the record. See Harris v. Apfel, 209
F.3d 413, 417 (5th Cir. 2000). Therefore, in the absence of any
specific argument suggesting that some potential error prejudiced
Mettlen’s claim, the ruling of the district court is AFFIRMED.
2