Ferrell v. Apfel ( 2000 )

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT
__________________
No. 99-11178
Summary Calendar
__________________
EDWIN H. FERRELL,
Plaintiff-Appellant,
versus
KENNETH S. APFEL, COMMISSIONER OF SOCIAL SECURITY,
Commissioner of the Social Security Administration of the
United States of America,
Defendant-Appellee.
_________________________________________________________________
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Northern District of Texas
(2:98-CV-147)
_________________________________________________________________
July 5, 2000
Before SMITH, BARKSDALE, and PARKER, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:*
Edwin H. Ferrell appeals the judgment affirming the denial of
social security disability benefits, claiming substantial evidence
does not support the Administrative Law Judge’s determination there
were a significant number of jobs in the national economy which he
could have performed.
The medical evidence established that Ferrell suffered from
heart and possible circulatory problems, but no treating physicians
placed any limitations on his ability to work prior to the
expiration of his insured status. Further, Ferrell testified at
*
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this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except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.
the administrative hearing that he is able to drive, walk, push,
pull, bend, lift, and sit and stand for short periods, as well as
work at his church and a local hospice. Although he also
complained of disabling pain, the ALJ was within his discretion to
discredit such subjective complaints. See Griego v. Sullivan, 940
F.2d 942, 945 (5th Cir. 1991). A vocational expert testified that
a person of Ferrell’s age, education, work history, and work
experience could perform light, semi-skilled jobs with a sedentary
exertional level and a sit/stand option. Furthermore, such jobs
existed in significant numbers in the national economy. Examples
include information clerk and production scheduler.
Because the administrative record does not contain any medical
evidence indicating that Ferrell was unable to perform light, semi-
skilled, sedentary work with a sit/stand option, and because no
physician determined that Ferrell was unable to perform any work
activity, Ferrell failed to meet his burden of proving he could not
perform the work identified by the vocational expert. See Selders
v. Sullivan, 914 F.2d 614, 618 (5th Cir. 1990). The vocational
expert’s unrebutted testimony provided the requisite substantial
evidence to support the ALJ’s determination that employment existed
for Ferrel. See Bowling v. Shalala, 36 F.3d 431, 434 (5th Cir.
1994).
AFFIRMED
- 2 -