Court Opinion

ID: 39176
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2010-04-25 20:21:09+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T17:16:12.136602
License: Public Domain

PER CURIAM:
  
   *
  

  The judgment of the district court is affirmed. The medical reports prior to 2002 are consistent with the finding that claimant can perform sedentary work. Her contention is based solely on answers of Doctor Bartlett on a form dated July 8, 2002. He had first examined her on May 16. His entries about her inability to sit or stand etc. are inconsistent with her own testimony, her statements at the emergency center five months earlier, and her lab reports. Those conclusions of Dr. Bartlett after apparently two contacts, based solely on what the patient told him, were rejected by the administrative judge. We find no error.
 

  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   Pursuant to 5th Cir. R. 47.5, the Court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5th Cir. R. 47.5.4.