Case Name: Carol WALKER Plaintiff-Appellant v. Nancy A. BERRYHILL, Acting Commissioner of Social Security Defendant-Appellee
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2017-11-15
Citations: 701 F. App'x 540
Docket Number: No. 17-1418
Parties: Carol WALKER Plaintiff-Appellant v. Nancy A. BERRYHILL, Acting Commissioner of Social Security Defendant-Appellee
Judges: Before GRUENDER, BOWMAN, and BENTON, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 701
Pages: 540–540

Head Matter:
Carol WALKER Plaintiff-Appellant v. Nancy A. BERRYHILL, Acting Commissioner of Social Security Defendant-Appellee
No. 17-1418
United States Court of Appeals, Eighth Circuit.
Submitted: November 09, 2017
Filed: November 15, 2017
Shannon Muse Carroll, Lane & Muse, Hot Springs, AR, for Plaintiff-Appellant
Traci B. Davis, Ruben Montemayor, Assistant Regional Counsel, Social Security Administration, Office of General Counsel Region VI, Dallas, TX, for Defendant-Ap-pellee
Before GRUENDER, BOWMAN, and BENTON, Circuit Judges.

Opinion:
PER CURIAM.
Carol Walker appeals the district court's order affirming the denial of disability insurance benefits. Having jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291, this court affirms.
Upon de novo review, this court agrees with the district court that substantial evidence on the record as a whole supports the administrative law judge's (ALJ's) weighing of the medical opinion evidence and Walker's subjective statements in formulating her residual functional capacity (RFC). See Igo v. Colvin, 839 F.3d 724, 728 (8th Cir. 2016) (standard of review); Myers v. Colvin, 721 F.3d 521, 527 (8th Cir. 2013) (RFC determination is based on all relevant evidence, including medical records, observations, of treating physicians and others, and claimant's own description of her limitations). Because the ALJ properly relied on the vocational expert's (VE's) response to the hypothetical that the ALJ posed, which was consistent with the ALJ's RFC findings, there is no merit to Walker's argument concerning the VE's testimony. See Gieseke v. Colvin, 770 F.3d 1186, 1189 (8th Cir. 2014).
The judgment is affirmed.
. The Honorable Barry A. Bryant, United States Magistrate Judge for the 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).