* Effective March 31, 1995, the functions of the Secr etary of Health and

Human Services in social security cases were transf erred to the Commissioner of Social Security. P.L. No. 103-296. In the text we continue to refer to the Secretary because she was the appropriate party at the time of the underlying administrative decision.

** This order and judgment is not binding precedent, e xcept under the doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, and col lateral estoppel. The court generally disfavors the citation of orders and judg ments; nevertheless, an order and judgment may be cited under the terms and condi tions of 10th Cir. R. 36.3.

*** Honorable Arthur L. Alarcon, Senior Circuit Judge, United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, sitting by designati on.

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS Filed 12/20/96 FOR THE TENTH CIRCUIT
MARCIAL SALCIDO,

Plaintiff-Appellant,
v. SHIRLEY S. CHATER, Commissioner of Social Security Administration, *

. No. 96-7052 (D.C. No. CIV-95-268-S) (E.D. Okla.)

ORDER AND JUDGMENT ** Before PORFILIO, ALARCON, *** and LUCERO, Circuit Judges.1 After examining the briefs and appellate record, th is panel has determined

unanimously to grant the parties’ request for a dec ision on the briefs without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(f) and 10th Cir. R. 34.1.9. Th e case is therefore ordered submitted without oral argument.
2 Marcial Salcido appeals from an order of the distri ct court affirming the Secretary’s decision denying his application for so cial security disability benefits and Supplemental Security Income (SSI). 1 Mr. Salcido filed for disability benefits and SSI on September 28, 1993. He allegeddisability due to a back injury resulting from a fall at work; he later also alleged hip pain and memory problems. Mr. Salcido’s requests were denied initi ally and on reconsideration. Following a de novo hearing on June 8, 1994, an adm inistrative law judge (ALJ) determined that he was not disabled within the mean ing of the Social Security Act. The district court affirmed the Secretary’s d ecision, and Mr. Salcido appealed to this court. We review the Secretary’s decision to determine whe ther the factual findings are supported by substantial evidence in the record viewed as a whole and whether the correct legal standards were applie d. Andrade v. Secretary of Health & Human Servs. , 985 F.2d 1045, 1047 (10th Cir. 1993). Substantia l evidence is "such relevant evidence as a reasonable mind might accept as adequate to support a conclusion." Fowler v. Bowen , 876 F.2d 1451, 1453 (10th Cir. 1989) (quotation omitted).3

The Secretary has established a five-step evaluatio n process for determining whether a claimant is disabled within t he meaning of the Social Security Act. See Williams v. Bowen , 844 F.2d 748, 750-52 (10th Cir. 1988) (discussing five-step disability test). When the analysis reaches step five, the Secretary bears the burden of showing that a claima nt retains the capacity to perform other work and that such work exists in the national economy. Id. at 751. The ALJ determined that Mr. Salcido retained the re sidual functional capacity (RFC) to perform a full range of sedentaryand light work. He denied benefits at step four, reasoning that Mr. Salcido c ould return to his past relevant work as a chicken processor. As an alternative, th e ALJ denied benefits at step five, finding that the Secretary had met its burden of showing that there existed occupations in the national economy in sufficient n umbers that Mr. Salcido could perform, given his impairment, age, education, workexperience, and RFC. Mr. Salcido raises a single issue. He contends the ALJ’s decision at step four is unsupported by substantial evidence due to his failure to develop the record. Mr. Salcido, however, fails to challenge t he ALJ’s determination at step4

five, which standing alone presents a sufficient ba sis for the Secretary’s denial of benefits. See Murrell v. Shalala , 43 F.3d 1388, 1390 (10th Cir. 1994). We need not address any other issues; Murrell is dispositive. AFFIRMED. ENTERED FOR THE COURT
Carlos F. Lucero Circuit Judge