Case ID: f-appx_87/html/0377-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "PER CURIAM.\n    ", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

Laurent SEGURA, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Jo Anne B. BARNHART, Commissioner of Social Security, Defendant-Appellee.
    No. 03-30771.
    Summary Calendar.
    United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit.
    Feb. 17, 2004.
    Joseph R. Oelkers, III, Lafayette, LA, for Plaintiff-Appellant.
    Keith Douglas Simonson, Office of General Counsel, Dallas, TX, for Defendant-Appellee.
    Before HIGGINBOTHAM, DAVIS, and PRADO, Circuit Judges.
   PER CURIAM.

Laurent Segura appeals the district court’s judgment affirming the Commissioner of Social Security’s denial of disability benefits. He argues that his limited vision in his left eye constitutes a nonexertional impairment that significantly affects his residual functional capacity and as such the Administrative Law Judge erred in relying exclusively upon the Guidelines. He also argues that the ALJ relied on a hypothetical question posed to a vocational expert which did not incorporate all of his disabilities.

Segura failed to raise the argument that his limited vision is a non-exertional impairment that significantly affects his residual functional capacity in the district court and it is waived. See Chaparro v. Bowen, 815 F.2d 1008, 1011 (5th Cir.1987). There is no reversible error because the ALJ’s hypothetical question incorporated the limitations that he recognized. See Bowling v. Shalala, 36 F.3d 431, 436 (5th Cir.1994).

AFFIRMED. 
      
       Pursuant to 5th Cir. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5th Cir. R. 47.5.4.