IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 01-30483 Summary Calendar

JOHNNIE W. NUGENT, JR.,

Plaintiff-Appellant,

versus

LARRY G. MASSANARI, ACTING COMMISSIONER OF SOCIAL SECURITY,

Defendant-Appellee.

-------------------- Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Louisiana (00-CV-1911) -------------------- October 19, 2001

Before HIGGINBOTHAM, WIENER, and BARKSDALE, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

Plaintiff-Appellant Johnnie Nugent appeals the district

court’s affirmance of the Social Security Commissioner’s decision

to deny disability benefits. Nugent contends that the

administrative law judge (ALJ) (1) incorrectly determined that

Nugent suffered no significant adverse effects from taking either

of his medications, Flexeril or Soma; (2) should not have relied

solely on the medical-vocational grid table in 20 C.F.R. Pt. 404,

Subpt. P., Appendix 2, Table 2, to determine Nugent’s disability,

given his pain and the nonexertional side effects from the

* 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 R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR.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. medication; and, (3) improperly determined that Nugent had a sixth

grade education as opposed to considering Nugent illiterate for

purposes of assessing his disability status.

The ALJ’s determination that the record did not indicate that

Nugent suffered significant adverse effects from taking his

medication is supported by substantial evidence. See Leggett v.

Chater,

(5th Cir. 1995); Adams v. Bowen,

(5th Cir. 1987). Furthermore, Nugent does not indicate how

the alleged side effects affected his residual functional capacity.

The ALJ’s reliance on the medical-vocational grid table was thus

not error. See Scott v. Shalala,

(5th Cir. 1994);

Crowley v. Apfel,

(5th Cir. 1999). And, even if

the ALJ should have considered Nugent illiterate as opposed to

having a limited education, the grid table rule to which illiteracy

applies for an individual of Nugent’s age and functional capacity,

as determined by the ALJ, indicates that a non-disabled finding is

appropriate.

As the district court’s affirmance of the Commissioner’s

decision to deny disability benefits was correct, the judgment is

AFFIRMED.

2