Segura v. Barnhart
This text of 87 F. App'x 377 (Segura v. Barnhart) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
Laurent Segura appeals the district court’s judgment affirming the Commissioner of Social Security’s denial of disability benefits. He argues that his limited vision in his left eye constitutes a nonexertional impairment that significantly affects his residual functional capacity and as such the Administrative Law Judge erred in relying exclusively upon the Guidelines. He also argues that the ALJ relied on a hypothetical question posed to a vocational expert which did not incorporate all of his disabilities.
*378 Segura failed to raise the argument that his limited vision is a non-exertional impairment that significantly affects his residual functional capacity in the district court and it is waived. See Chaparro v. Bowen, 815 F.2d 1008, 1011 (5th Cir.1987). There is no reversible error because the ALJ’s hypothetical question incorporated the limitations that he recognized. See Bowling v. Shalala, 36 F.3d 431, 436 (5th Cir.1994).
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Pursuant to 5th Cir. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5th Cir. R. 47.5.4.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
87 F. App'x 377, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/segura-v-barnhart-ca5-2004.