Williams v. Comm Social Security

Filing 920061019


Download PDF
NOT RECOMMENDED FOR FULL-TEXT PUBLICATION File Name: 06a0781n.06 Filed: October 19, 2006 No. 06-5250 UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SIXTH CIRCUIT ALLEN F. WILLIAMS, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. COMMISSIONER OF SOCIAL SECURITY, Defendant-Appellee. ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ON APPEAL FROM THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF TENNESSEE MEMORANDUM OPINION BEFORE: KEITH and McKEAGUE, Circuit Judges; and CLELAND, District Judge.* PER CURIAM. Allen F. Williams appeals the district court's grant of summary judgment in favor of the Commissioner of Social Security (the "Commissioner"), affirming the Commissioner's decision to deny Williams's application for supplemental security income and disability insurance benefits. The parties waived oral argument on appeal. We "must affirm the Commissioner's conclusions absent a determination that the Commissioner has failed to apply the correct legal standards or has made findings of fact unsupported by substantial evidence in the record." Longworth v. Comm'r of Soc. Sec., 402 F.3d 591, 595 (6th Cir. 2005) (citations omitted); see also 42 U.S.C. 405(g) ("The findings of the Commissioner of Social Security as to any fact, if supported by substantial evidence, shall be The Honorable Robert H. Cleland, United States District Judge for the Eastern District of Michigan, sitting by designation. * No. 06-5250 Williams v. Comm'r of Soc. Sec. conclusive . . . ."). Having carefully considered the record on appeal, the briefs of the parties, and the applicable law, we conclude that the Commissioner applied the correct legal standards in arriving at a decision supported by substantial evidence. Accordingly, we affirm summary judgment for the Commissioner for the reasons stated more fully in the district court's memorandum opinion filed on January 11, 2006. -2-

Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.

Why Is My Information Online?