Boyd v. SHHS

Opinion

USCA1 Opinion

March 6, 1995         [NOT FOR PUBLICATION]
                            UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
                                FOR THE FIRST CIRCUIT

___________________

No. 94-1966

MIGUELINA BOYD,

                                Plaintiff, Appellant,

                                          v.

                       SECRETARY OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES,

                                 Defendant, Appellee.

__________________

                     APPEAL FROM THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

                           FOR THE DISTRICT OF PUERTO RICO

                    [Hon. Jose Antonio Fuste, U.S. District Judge]
                                              ___________________

                                 ___________________

                                        Before

                               Torruella, Chief Judge,
                                          ___________
                          Boudin and Stahl, Circuit Judges.
                                            ______________

                                 ___________________

               Paul Ramos Morales on brief for appellant.
               __________________
               Guillermo Gil, United States Attorney, Maria Hortensia Rios,
               _____________                          ____________________
          Assistant United States Attorney,  and Jessie M. Klyce, Assistant
                                                 _______________
          Regional  Counsel,  Region  I,  Department of  Health  and  Human
          Services, on brief for appellee.

__________________

                                  __________________



Per  Curiam.   This  is an  appeal from  a district
                      ___________

            court  judgment  affirming a  decision  of  the Secretary  of

            Health  and Human  Services denying  appellant's applications

            for  social security disability benefits and disabled widow's

            benefits.   After  a  hearing, the  Administrative Law  Judge

            ("ALJ") found that appellant retained the functional capacity

            to return to her past relevant work as a hairdresser and thus

            was not entitled to  receive disability insurance benefits on

            her  own account nor on  the account of  her deceased spouse.

            Upon a careful review  of the transcript, record  and briefs,

            we agree with  the district court that there  was substantial

            evidence  to support the ALJ's thorough decision.  We find no

            basis  for appellant's  contentions  that the  ALJ failed  to

            adequately  explore  and  assess  appellant's  complaints  of

            subjective pain and evidence of mental impairment.  

                      Affirmed.
                      ________

-2-