* 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 R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5 TH C IR .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. 96-50928 Summary Calendar JAMES L. LAMBERTH, Plaintiff-Appellant, versus KENNETH S. APFEL, COMMISSIONER OF SOCIAL SECURITY, Defendant-Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Texas USDC No. A-94-CV-796 March 2, 1998 Before JOLLY, BENAVIDES, and PARKER, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM: * James Lamberth appeals from the magistra te judgeÂ’s judgment affirming the denial of his application for supplemental security income. He argues that substantial evidence did not exist to support the finding that he was not disa bled. He further argues that the Magistrate Judge erred in not remanding his claim to the Administration in light of new evidence he submitted.

Substantial evidence existed to support the finding that Lamberth was not disabled. S ee Ripley v. Chater , 67 F.3d 552, 555 (5th Cir. 1995); Moore v. Sullivan , 91 9 F.2d 901, 905 (5th Cir. 1990). The magistrate judge did not err in not remanding LamberthÂ’s clai m because it has not been shown that there is a reasonable possibility that the outcome might have been different had the new evidence been before the Commissioner. See Latham v. Shalala , 36 F.3d 482, 483 (5th Cir. 1994).

AFFIRMED.

No. 96-50928