Ronald Wayne Morton, Jr., appeals the district court’s 1 order upholding the denial of supplemental security income and disability insurance benefits. We find that substantial evidence, including evidence the Appeals Council considered, supports the administrative law judge’s (ALJ’s) decision. See Van Vickle v. Astrue, 589 F.3d 825, 828 & n. 2 (8th Cir. 2008). As to the issues Morton raises on appeal, we conclude that he failed to meet his burden of establishing that his anxiety, depression, or knee problems were severe impairments. See Kirby v. Astrue, 500 F.3d 705, 707-08 (8th Cir. 2007) (if impairment has no more than minimal effect on claimant’s ability to work, it does not qualify as severe). We also find no merit to Morton’s assertion that the ALJ failed to develop the record on his mental impairments and his knee and shoulder problems. See McCoy v. Astrue, 648 F.3d 605, 612 (8th Cir. 2011) (ALJ has duty to develop record, but duty is not never-ending and ALJ is not required to disprove every possible impairment; ALJ is required to order medical tests and éxaminations only if medical records presented to him do not give sufficient medical evidence to determine if claimant is disabled). Finally, we disagree with Morton’s assertions that vocational expert testimony was required due to nonexertional limitations related to his depression, anxiety, and knee problems. See Ellis v. Barnhart, 392 F.3d 988, 996 (8th Cir. 2005) (where nonexertional impairments do not significantly limit or diminish claimant’s residual functional capacity to perform full range of activities listed in Medical-Vocational Guidelines, Commissioner may consult Guidelines to determine if claimant can make adjustment to other work). The judgment of the district court is affirmed.