United States Court of Appeals FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT ___________

No. 99-1934 ___________

James V. Harvey, Jr., * * Appellant, * * Appeal from the United States v. * District Court for the * Western District of Missouri. Kenneth S. Apfel, * * [UNPUBLISHED] Appellee. * ___________

Submitted: December 7, 1999 Filed: December 10, 1999 ___________

Before BEAM, LOKEN, and MORRIS SHEPPARD ARNOLD, Circuit Judges. ___________

PER CURIAM.

James V. Harvey, Jr., appeals the district court’s1 denial of summary judgment and its order affirming the Commissioner’s decision to deny Harvey’s application for disability insurance benefits and supplemental security income. Harvey had alleged he could not work because of a sleeping disorder, a pinched nerve in his right

1 The Honorable John T. Maughmer, United States Magistrate Judge for the Western District of Missouri, to whom the case was referred for final disposition by consent of the parties pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(c). forearm, and surgery above his left eye. For reversal, he challenges the adequacy of the hypothetical posed to the vocational expert by the administrative law judge (ALJ).

Having carefully reviewed the record and the parties’ briefs, we conclude the hypothetical included the impairments the ALJ found were adequately supported by the record as a whole, and the descriptive terms used sufficiently identified those impairments. See 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1520a(b)(3); 416.920a(b)(3) (1998); Roe v. Chater, 92 F.3d 672, 675-76 & n.6 (8th Cir. 1996). Accordingly, because an extended opinion would serve no useful purpose in this fact-intensive case, we affirm the district court without further discussion. See 8th Cir. R. 47B.

A true copy.

Attest:

CLERK, U.S. COURT OF APPEALS, EIGHTH CIRCUIT.

-2-