Case Name: Thomas NUNEZ, Jr., Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Jo Anne B. BARNHART, Commissioner of Social Security, Defendant-Appellee
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2006-10-30
Citations: 204 F. App'x 374
Docket Number: No. 06-50430
Parties: Thomas NUNEZ, Jr., Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Jo Anne B. BARNHART, Commissioner of Social Security, Defendant-Appellee.
Judges: 
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 204
Pages: 374–375

Head Matter:
Thomas NUNEZ, Jr., Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Jo Anne B. BARNHART, Commissioner of Social Security, Defendant-Appellee.
No. 06-50430
Summary Calendar.
United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit.
Oct. 30, 2006.
Mary Ellen Felps, Austin, TX, for Plaintiff-Appellant.
Craig A. Gargotta, U.S. Attorney’s Office Western District of Texas, San Antonio, TX, Defendant-Appellee.
Before DeMOSS, STEWART and PRADO, Circuit Judges.

Opinion:
PER CURIAM:
Thomas Nunez, Jr. ("Nunez") filed a claim under the Social Security Act for Supplemental Security Income ("SSI"). After two evidentiary hearings, the Administrative Law Judge ("ALJ") denied Nunez's claim and the Appeals Council affirmed. Treating the decision of the Appeals Council as the final decision of the Commissioner of Social Security, Nunez filed suit in the district court for the Western District of Texas seeking judicial review of the Commissioner's decision. The case was referred to a Magistrate Judge who reviewed the record and briefs submitted by both parties. The district court entered final judgment affirming the Commissioner's decision to deny Nunez benefits. Nunez appeals to this Court.
Our review is limited to determining (1) whether there is substantial evidence in the record as a whole to support the Commissioner's decision, and (2) whether the Commissioner's decision comports with relevant legal standards. Jones v. Apfel, 174 F.3d 692, 693 (5th Cir.1999). We have carefully reviewed the briefs, the record excerpts, and relevant portions of the record itself. For the reasons stated in the Magistrate Judge's Memorandum Opinion and Order, we find that the Commissioner's decision is supported by substantial evidence and is based on a proper application of the law. We affirm the decision of the district court to enter final judgment against Nunez.
AFFIRMED.
Pursuant to 5th Cir. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5th Cir. R. 47.5.4.