In Daniel v. Gardner, 404 F.2d 889 (4th Cir. 1968), we affirmed the district court’s holding that this appellant was not entitled to disability benefits under the Social Security Act. In the present appeal she contests the Secretary’s refusal to reopen the issue of her disability as of the date her insured status expired. Submitted on behalf of her most recent application were only two documents not previously considered. Both of these related to conditions arising after the expiration of her insured status, and the Secretary determined that they failed to warrant reopening, since they presented no new evidence material to her condition while insured, as required by the Act. That determination is supported by substantial evidence. We find oral argument unnecessary and summarily affirm on the opinion of the district court.

Affirmed.