Yanez v. Barnhart , 207 F. App'x 461 ( 2006 )


Menu:
  •                                                         United States Court of Appeals
    Fifth Circuit
    F I L E D
    IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS        November 30, 2006
    FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT             Charles R. Fulbruge III
    Clerk
    No. 06-20283
    Summary Calendar
    CIPRIANO YANEZ,
    Plaintiff - Appellant,
    v.
    JO ANNE B. BARNHART, COMMISSIONER OF SOCIAL SECURITY,
    Defendant - Appellee.
    --------------------
    Appeal from the United States District Court
    for the Southern District of Texas, Houston Division
    USDC No. 4:04-CV-4604
    --------------------
    Before DeMOSS, STEWART and PRADO, Circuit Judges.
    PER CURIAM:*
    Cipriano Yanez (“Yanez”) filed a claim under the Social
    Security Act for Supplemental Security Income (“SSI”).        An
    Administrative Law Judge (“ALJ”) denied Yanez’s claim and the
    Appeals Council affirmed the decision of the ALJ.    Treating the
    decision of the Appeals Council as the final decision of the
    Commissioner of Social Security, Yanez filed suit in the district
    court for the Southern District of Texas seeking judicial review
    *
    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    that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent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.
    of the Commissioner’s decision.   Yanez and the Commissioner filed
    cross motions for summary judgment, and the matter was referred
    to a Magistrate Judge for report and recommendation.   The
    Magistrate Judge recommended that Yanez’s motion for summary
    judgment be denied, and the Commissioner’s motion for summary
    judgment be granted.   The district court adopted the Magistrate
    Judge’s recommendation and entered final judgment dismissing
    Yanez’s action.   Yanez appeals to this Court.
    Our review is limited to determining (1) whether there is
    substantial evidence in the record as a whole to support the
    Commissioner’s decision, and (2) whether the Commissioner’s
    decision comports with relevant legal standards.    Jones v. Apfel,
    
    174 F.3d 692
    , 693 (5th Cir. 1999).   We have carefully reviewed
    the briefs, the record excerpts, and relevant portions of the
    record itself.    For the reasons stated in the Magistrate Judge’s
    Memorandum and Recommendation, as adopted by the district court,
    we affirm the decision of the district court to enter final
    judgment against Yanez.
    AFFIRMED.
    

Document Info

Docket Number: 06-20283

Citation Numbers: 207 F. App'x 461

Judges: Demoss, Stewart, Prado

Filed Date: 11/30/2006

Precedential Status: Non-Precedential

Modified Date: 11/5/2024