Tamiko Nelson v. Carolyn W. Colvin

Filing

PER CURIAM OPINION FILED - THE COURT: James B. Loken, Pasco M. Bowman and Jane Kelly (UNPUBLISHED) [4269882] [14-2984]

United States Court of Appeals
For the Eighth Circuit
___________________________
No. 14-2984
___________________________
Tamiko Nelson
lllllllllllllllllllll Plaintiff - Appellant
v.
Carolyn W. Colvin, Acting Commissioner of Social Security Administration
lllllllllllllllllllll Defendant - Appellee
____________
Appeal from United States District Court
for the Western District of Arkansas - Texarkana
____________
Submitted: April 24, 2015
Filed: April 29, 2015
[Unpublished]
____________
Before LOKEN, BOWMAN, and KELLY, Circuit Judges.
____________
PER CURIAM.

Appellate Case: 14-2984

Page: 1

Date Filed: 04/29/2015 Entry ID: 4269882

Tamiko Nelson appeals the judgment of the district court1 affirming the
Commissioner’s denial of disability insurance benefits and supplemental security
income, after her hearing before an administrative law judge (ALJ). On appeal,
Nelson argues that the ALJ did not properly assess the combination of her
impairments, the ALJ’s residual functional capacity determination was not supported
by substantial evidence, and the ALJ’s hypothetical to the vocational expert was
improper. Following careful review, we conclude that the decision is supported by
substantial evidence on the record as a whole, and that Nelson’s arguments do not
establish a basis for remand or warrant reversal. See Myers v. Colvin, 721 F.3d 521,
524 (8th Cir. 2013) (standard of review); Davidson v. Astrue, 501 F.3d 987, 989 (8th
Cir. 2007) (“Substantial evidence is less than a preponderance, but enough evidence
that a reasonable mind would find adequate to support the Commissioner’s
decision.”).
Accordingly, we affirm the district court’s judgment. See 8th Cir. R. 47B.
______________________________

1

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).
-2-

Appellate Case: 14-2984

Page: 2

Date Filed: 04/29/2015 Entry ID: 4269882