* Pursuant to 5 TH C IR . R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5 TH C IR .

R. 47.5.4. IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 99-10764 Summary Calendar RAY HONSBERGER, Plaintiff-Appellant, versus KENNETH S. APFEL, COMMISSIONER OF SOCIAL SECURITY ADMINISTRATION, Defendant-Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of Texas USDC No. 4:98-CV-617-Y February 25, 2000 Before DAVIS, EMILIO M. GARZA and DENNIS, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM: * Ray Honsberger appeals the magistrate judgeÂ’s judgment affirming the decision of the Commissioner to deny HonsbergerÂ’s disability claim. Our review is limited to determining whether the record as a whole shows that the CommissionerÂ’s decision is supported by substantial evidence and whether the Commissioner applied the proper legal standards. See Anthony v. Sullivan , 954 F.2d 289, 292 (5th Cir. 1992). The ALJÂ’s determination that HonsbergerÂ’s medical conditions failed to meet the criteria set forth in the Impairment Ratings is supported by substantial evidence. As for HonsbergerÂ’s ability to perform work despite his complaints of severe headaches and neck pain, the ALJ has great discretion in determining whether pain is disabling. See Wren v. Sullivan , 925 F.2d 123, 128 (5th Cir. 1991). The ALJ acted within his discretion in rejecting these claims. See Griego v. Sullivan , 940 F.2d 942, 945 (5th Cir. 1991). We also find no error in the ALJÂ’s determination that numerous jobs exist meeting HonsbergerÂ’s limitations. See Morris v. Bowen , 864 F.2d 333, 335-36 (5th Cir. 1988). Thus, the ALJ properly concluded that Honsberger is not disabled. For the foregoing reasons, we affirm the judgment of the magistrate judge.

AFFIRMED.

No. 99-10764