Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-ca8-07-01253/USCOURTS-ca8-07-01253-0/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 864
Nature of Suit: Social Security - SSID Title XVI
Cause of Action: 

---

1

It appears from the Administrative Record in this case that the Appellant spells

his own first name "Egneacio." Nevertheless, beginning with the District Court's

decision, the name has been spelled "Egnacio." Wiley's own brief uses that spelling,

so we will as well.

United States Court of Appeals

FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT

___________

No. 07-1253

___________

Egnacio Wiley, *

*

Appellant, * Appeal from the United States

* District Court for the

v. * Western District of Missouri.

*

Michael J. Astrue, Commissioner * [UNPUBLISHED]

of Social Security, *

*

Appellee. *

___________

Submitted: October 19, 2007

Filed: October 25, 2007

___________

Before BYE, BOWMAN, and SMITH, Circuit Judges.

___________

PER CURIAM.

Egnacio Wiley1

 appeals the denial of his applications seeking to collect

disability insurance benefits and supplemental security income from the Social

Security Administration (SSA). We affirm.

Appellate Case: 07-1253 Page: 1 Date Filed: 10/25/2007 Entry ID: 3366007
2

The Honorable Richard E. Dorr, United States District Judge for the Western

District of Missouri.

-2-

On August 30, 2004, at age 32, Wiley applied for benefits, alleging disability

since June 19, 2002, due to persistent back and leg pain. The Commissioner of the

SSA denied benefits. Wiley sought review by an Administrative Law Judge (ALJ),

who determined after a hearing that Wiley was not disabled within the meaning of the

Social Security Act because he retained the capacity to perform a full range of light

work, and that the Commissioner had proved the existence of jobs in the community

that Wiley could perform. (At the hearing before the ALJ in June 2005, Wiley

amended the onset date of his disability to July 30, 2004, since he worked as a porter

through most of July 2004.) The SSA Appeals Council denied Wiley's request for

review thus making the ALJ's decision the final determination. Upon judicial review,

the District Court2

 affirmed the ALJ's denial of benefits. Wiley appeals.

We review de novo the District Court's decision affirming the ALJ. Nicola v.

Astrue, 480 F.3d 885, 886 (8th Cir. 2007). At the time of the decision, Wiley was not

engaged in substantial gainful activity and his impairment was categorized as severe,

but the ALJ determined that Wiley's limitations were not credible to the degree alleged

and that the Commissioner demonstrated that Wiley's impairment did not preclude

substantial gainful activity. After careful review of the record, we hold that the denial

of benefits to Wiley is supported by substantial evidence on the record as a whole.

See id. The judgment of the District Court is affirmed.

______________________________

Appellate Case: 07-1253 Page: 2 Date Filed: 10/25/2007 Entry ID: 3366007