Peggy Jones v. Larry Massanari , 25 F. App'x 497 ( 2002 )


Menu:
  •                    United States Court of Appeals
    FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT
    ___________
    No. 01-3021
    ___________
    Peggy A. Jones,                       *
    *
    Appellant,                 *
    * Appeal from the United States
    v.                              * District Court for the Western
    * District of Arkansas.
    1
    JoAnne B. Barnhart, Social            *
    Security Administration Commissioner, *    [UNPUBLISHED]
    *
    Appellee.                  *
    ___________
    Submitted: February 4, 2002
    Filed: February 7, 2002
    ___________
    Before LOKEN, BEAM, and RILEY, Circuit Judges.
    ___________
    PER CURIAM.
    Peggy A. Jones appeals the district court’s2 decision upholding the
    Commissioner’s denial of her application for disability insurance benefits. We
    1
    JoAnne B. Barnhart has been appointed to serve as Commissioner of Social
    Security, and is substituted as appellee pursuant to Federal Rule of Appellate
    Procedure 43(c)(2).
    2
    The Honorable H. Franklin Waters, United States District Judge for the
    Western District of Arkansas, adopting the report and recommendations of the
    Honorable Beverly Stites Jones, United States Magistrate Judge for the Western
    District of Arkansas.
    review the Commissioner’s decision to determine whether it is supported by
    substantial evidence on the record as a whole. See Pyland v. Apfel, 
    149 F.3d 873
    ,
    876 (8th Cir. 1998).
    Having carefully reviewed the record, we find no basis for disturbing the
    Administrative Law Judge’s (ALJ) determination that Jones’s impairment was not
    severe prior to her date last insured. See Gwathney v. Chater, 
    104 F.3d 1043
    , 1045
    (8th Cir. 1997) (ALJ may discount subjective complaints inconsistent with medical
    reports and daily activities to determine claimant can perform basic work activities).
    Jones waived her argument that the record should have been supplemented with
    additional medical tests by failing to properly raise it in the district court. See Yeazel
    v. Apfel, 
    148 F.3d 910
    , 912 (8th Cir. 1998). In any event, the argument is meritless.
    See 
    Pyland, 149 F.3d at 877-78
    (evidence must support disability within relevant time
    period).
    Accordingly, we affirm the judgment of the district court. See 8th Cir. R. 47B.
    A true copy.
    Attest:
    CLERK, U.S. COURT OF APPEALS, EIGHTH CIRCUIT.
    -2-
    

Document Info

Docket Number: 01-3021

Citation Numbers: 25 F. App'x 497

Judges: Loken, Beam, Riley

Filed Date: 2/7/2002

Precedential Status: Non-Precedential

Modified Date: 11/5/2024