Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-ca8-09-03495/USCOURTS-ca8-09-03495-0/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 863
Nature of Suit: Social Security - DIWC/DIWW (405(g))
Cause of Action: 

---

1

The Honorable James C. England, United States Magistrate Judge for the

Western District of Missouri, to whom the case was referred for final disposition by

consent of the parties pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(c). 

United States Court of Appeals

FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT

___________

No. 09-3495

___________

Dustin Sours, *

*

Appellant, *

* Appeal from the United States

v. * District Court for the Western

* District of Missouri.

Michael J. Astrue, *

Commissioner of Social Security, * [UNPUBLISHED]

*

Appellee. *

___________

Submitted: April 30, 2010

Filed: May 7, 2010

___________

Before LOKEN, BYE, and SHEPHERD, Circuit Judges.

___________

PER CURIAM.

Dustin Sours appeals the district court’s1

 order affirming the denial of disability

insurance benefits (DIB) and supplemental security income (SSI). Sours alleged

disability since February 2003 from, among other things, clubfeet, herniated discs,

obesity, and depression. Following several hearings, and a remand by the Appeals

Council, an administrative law judge (ALJ) found that certain of Sours’s impairments

Appellate Case: 09-3495 Page: 1 Date Filed: 05/07/2010 Entry ID: 3662431
-2-

were not severe; that the other impairments, while severe, did not meet the

requirements of any listing, alone or combined; that Sours’s subjective complaints

were not fully credible; that his residual functional capacity (RFC) for sedentary work

precluded his past relevant work; and that based on a vocational expert’s response to

the ALJ’s hypothetical, Sours could perform certain unskilled sedentary jobs existing

in substantial numbers in Missouri and nationally. The Appeals Council denied

review.

We agree with the district court that the ALJ’s decision is supported by

substantial evidence on the record as a whole. See Van Vickle v. Astrue, 539 F.3d

825, 828 & n.2 (8th Cir. 2008) (standard of review); see also Finch v. Astrue, 547

F.3d 933, 935-36 (8th Cir. 2008) (if ALJ explicitly discredits claimant and gives good

reasons for doing so, courts will normally defer to his judgment); Kirby v. Astrue, 500

F.3d 705, 707-08 (8th Cir. 2007) (impairment is not severe if it amounts only to slight

abnormality that would not significantly limit claimant’s physical or mental ability to

do basic work activities; it is claimant’s burden to establish his impairment is severe);

Tellez v. Barnhart, 403 F.3d 953, 957 (8th Cir. 2005) (in determinating RFC, ALJ

must first evaluate claimant’s credibility; RFC must take into account all relevant

evidence, including medical records and observations of treating physicians and

others). We decline to consider the evidence and impairments Sours references for

the first time on appeal, but if he now meets the requirements for SSI (as his insured

status for DIB has expired), he should file a new application. See Fowler v. Shalala,

46 F.3d 876, 878-79 (8th Cir. 1995). Accordingly, we affirm.

______________________________

Appellate Case: 09-3495 Page: 2 Date Filed: 05/07/2010 Entry ID: 3662431