Turnbow v. Social Security Administration ( 2006 )


Menu:
  •                                                               United States Court of Appeals
    Fifth Circuit
    F I L E D
    IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
    FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT                       March 28, 2006
    Charles R. Fulbruge III
    Clerk
    No. 05-30901
    Summary Calendar
    WANDA TURNBOW,
    Plaintiff-Appellant,
    v.
    SOCIAL SECURITY ADMINISTRATION
    Defendant-Appellee.
    Appeal from the United States District Court
    for the Western District of Louisiana
    (3:04-CV-01377-RGJ-JDK)
    Before KING, WIENER, and DeMOSS, Circuit Judges.
    PER CURIAM:*
    Appellant Wanda Turnbow appeals the district court’s adoption
    of the magistrate judge’s report and recommendation that the
    judgment of the Social Security Administration (“SSA”) denying her
    application for disability benefits be affirmed. Turnbow’s primary
    argument   on   appeal   is   that   the   SSA   Appeals   Council   and    the
    magistrate judge erred in not considering the new evidence that she
    presented to the Appeals Council after the administrative law judge
    *
    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    this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except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.
    rendered her opinion.   Turnbow’s argument is without merit: Under
    Higginbotham v. Barnhart, a district court should review additional
    information that a petitioner submits to the Appeals Council after
    the ALJ has reached a decision.1       Under Falco v. Shalala, however,
    this rule applies only if the new information relates to the time
    period for which the benefits were sought.2          Thus, the Appeals
    Council and the district court are under no obligation to review
    information submitted for the first time to the Appeals Council
    when, as here, it relates only to the subsequent deterioration of
    a previously non-disabling condition.
    The remainder of Turnbow’s arguments on appeal are without
    merit; and, after reviewing the record, we affirm for the reasons
    given by the magistrate judge.
    AFFIRMED.
    1
    
    405 F.3d 332
     (5th Cir. 2005).
    2
    
    27 F.3d 160
    , 164 (5th Cir. 1994).
    2
    

Document Info

Docket Number: 05-30901

Judges: DeMOSS, King, Per Curiam, Wiener

Filed Date: 3/28/2006

Precedential Status: Non-Precedential

Modified Date: 11/5/2024