Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-ca8-14-02984/USCOURTS-ca8-14-02984-0/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 865
Nature of Suit: Social Security - RSI (405(g))
Cause of Action: 

---

United States Court of Appeals

For the Eighth Circuit

___________________________

No. 14-2984

___________________________

Tamiko Nelson

lllllllllllllllllllll Plaintiff - Appellant

v.

Carolyn W. Colvin, Acting Commissioner of Social Security Administration

lllllllllllllllllllll Defendant - Appellee

____________

Appeal from United States District Court 

for the Western District of Arkansas - Texarkana

____________

 Submitted: April 24, 2015

Filed: April 29, 2015 

[Unpublished]

____________

Before LOKEN, BOWMAN, and KELLY, Circuit Judges. 

____________

PER CURIAM.

Appellate Case: 14-2984 Page: 1 Date Filed: 04/29/2015 Entry ID: 4269882 
Tamiko Nelson appeals the judgment of the district court affirming the

1

Commissioner’s denial of disability insurance benefits and supplemental security

income, after her hearing before an administrative law judge (ALJ). On appeal,

Nelson argues that the ALJ did not properly assess the combination of her

impairments, the ALJ’s residual functional capacity determination was not supported

by substantial evidence, and the ALJ’s hypothetical to the vocational expert was

improper. Following careful review, we conclude that the decision is supported by

substantial evidence on the record as a whole, and that Nelson’s arguments do not

establish a basis for remand or warrant reversal. See Myers v. Colvin, 721 F.3d 521,

524 (8th Cir. 2013) (standard of review); Davidson v. Astrue, 501 F.3d 987, 989 (8th

Cir. 2007) (“Substantial evidence is less than a preponderance, but enough evidence

that a reasonable mind would find adequate to support the Commissioner’s

decision.”).

Accordingly, we affirm the district court’s judgment. See 8th Cir. R. 47B.

______________________________

The Honorable Barry A. Bryant, United States Magistrate Judge for the

1

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

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

-2-

Appellate Case: 14-2984 Page: 2 Date Filed: 04/29/2015 Entry ID: 4269882