United States Court of Appeals
Fifth Circuit
F I L E D
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
For the Fifth Circuit August 17, 2007
Summary Calendar Charles R. Fulbruge III
No. 07-10396 Clerk
LINDA K. GALUSHA,
Plaintiff-Appellant,
VERSUS
MICHAEL J. ASTRUE, Commissioner of Social Security,
Defendant-Appellee.
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Northern District of Texas
(1:05-CV-51)
Before DeMOSS, STEWART, and PRADO, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:*
Appellant Linda K. Galusha (“Galusha”) appeals from the
district court’s judgment affirming the Commissioner of Social
Security’s decision to deny her application for a period of
disability and disability insurance benefits. We affirm the
judgment of the district court.
In 1998, Galusha filed an application for a period of
disability and disability insurance benefits with the Commissioner
of Social Security (“Commissioner”). Her application was denied.
Galusha subsequently requested a hearing before an Administrative
*
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opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under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.
Law Judge (“ALJ”). Based on a review of the administrative record,
the ALJ determined that Galusha was not disabled nor entitled to
benefits because she did not have a “severe” impairment. On
Galusha’s request for review, the Appeals Council for the Social
Security Administration (“Appeals Council”) issued an order
vacating the hearing decision and remanding for further
proceedings. On remand, the ALJ conducted a supplemental hearing
and again issued a decision adverse to Galusha, determining that
even though she had “severe” impairments, none of the impairments
were severe enough to meet or equal in severity any impairment in
the Listing of Impairments and further, Galusha retained the
residual functional capacity to perform her past relevant work. On
Galusha’s second request for review, the Appeals Council determined
that there was no basis for changing the ALJ’s decision and denied
Galusha’s request. Thus, the ALJ’s decision became the final
decision of the Commissioner. Galusha appealed this final decision
to the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Texas. The
district court referred the case to a magistrate judge, who found
that the ALJ’s decision was supported by substantial evidence and
applied the proper legal standards. The district court adopted the
Report and Recommendation of the Magistrate Judge and dismissed
Galusha’s case.
Galusha argues on appeal that the district court erred in
determining that the ALJ’s decision was based on the proper legal
standard and supported by substantial evidence. According to
2
Galusha, the ALJ improperly rejected a treating doctor’s opinion
and did not properly consider Galusha’s residual functional
capacity. Our review is limited to determining whether there is
substantial evidence in the record as a whole to support the
Commissioner’s decision and whether the Commissioner’s decision
comports with relevant legal standards. Jones v. Apfel, 174 F.3d
692, 693 (5th Cir. 1999). Having carefully reviewed the parties’
briefs and the relevant portions of the record, we affirm the
decision of the district court for essentially the reasons stated
in the Magistrate Judge’s Report and Recommendation.
AFFIRMED.
3