Gibbons v. Barnhart

¶1 The ALJ’s decisions was supported by substantial evidence, and the ALJ used the proper legal standards to evaluate the evidence. Brown v. Apfel, 192 F.3d 492, 496 (5th Cir.1999). Despite Gibbons’ claims of disabling symptoms to her treating doctors, therapy notes and school records show that throughout the relevant time period Gibbons engaged in a full range of activities, including regularly going to the grocery store, acting as the sole caretaker for her child, attending technical and acupuncture schools, making new friends, and successfully losing weight. Further, Gibbons could perform other jobs existing in significant numbers in the national economy such as packing boxes, cleaning vehicles, or assembling products. The ALJ also properly determined that the opinion of Gibbons’ treating doctors were in contradiction with their examination notes and the record as a whole. See Greenspan v. Shalala, 38 F.3d 232, 237 (5th Cir.1994). The district court’s decision is AFFIRMED.