Der KI-Arbeitsbereich für Juristen
- Rechtsrecherche mit Zugriff auf über 1 Million Quellen
- Dokumentenautomatisierung
- Mandatsverwaltung
- Gehostet in der EU und der Schweiz
14 Tage kostenlos testen (10 Fragen/Tag während der Testphase)
Der KI-Arbeitsbereich für Juristen
14 Tage kostenlos testen (10 Fragen/Tag während der Testphase)
14-1361•Lisa R. Lopez v. Carolyn W. Colvin, Acting Commissioner of Social Security
14-1361Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit30.04.2015
United States Court of Appeals
For the Eighth Circuit
___________________________
No. 14-3159
___________________________
Lisa R. Lopez
lllllllllllllllllllll Plaintiff - Appellant
v.
Carolyn W. Colvin, Acting Commissioner of Social Security
lllllllllllllllllllll Defendant - Appellee
____________
Appeal from United States District Court
for the Western District of Arkansas - Texarkana
____________
Submitted: April 22, 2015
Filed: April 27, 2015
[Unpublished]
____________
Before LOKEN, BOWMAN, and KELLY, Circuit Judges.
____________
PER CURIAM.
-- 1 of 2 --
Lisa R. Lopez appeals the judgment of the district court affirming the1
Commissioner’s denial of disability insurance benefits and supplemental security
income, after her hearing before an administrative law judge (ALJ). Liberally
construing her brief, which largely consists of materials generated after the ALJ’s
decision in this matter, Lopez appears to challenge the sufficiency of the evidence
supporting the ALJ’s decision. Following careful review, we conclude that the
decision is supported by substantial evidence on the record as a whole, and that the
post-decision materials do not require remand for consideration by the Commissioner.
See Myers v. Colvin, 721 F.3d 521, 524 (8th Cir. 2013) (standard of review); Woolf
v. Shalala, 3 F.3d 1210, 1215 (8th Cir. 1993) (requirements for remand for
consideration of additional evidence).
Accordingly, we affirm the district court’s judgment. See 8th Cir. R. 47B.
______________________________
The Honorable Barry A. Bryant, United States Magistrate Judge for the1
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-
-- 2 of 2 --
Verbinden Sie Omnilex, um den Rechtskorpus über Ihren KI-Assistenten zu durchsuchen.