* 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 R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5 TH C IR .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. United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit FILED August 2, 2004 Charles R. Fulbruge III Clerk IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 03-51346 Summary Calendar ELIJAH LANG, Plaintiff-Appellant, versus JO ANNE B. BARNHART, COMMISSIONER OF SOCIAL SECURITY, Defendant-Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Texas USDC No. W-02-CV-258 Before DAVIS, SMITH and DENNIS, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM: * Elijah Lang appeals the affirmance of the Commissioner§ 405. He argues that the disability decision was not supported by substantial evidence and was not made under the proper legal standards, that the administrative law judge (ALJ) used improper criteria to assess his credibility, that the magistrate judge erred in its review of the administrative record, and that the ALJ was required to address whether he could maintain gainful work activity.

We hold that the disability determination was supported by substantial evidence and was made under the proper legal standards. See Ripley v. Chater , 67 F.3d 552, 555 (5th Cir. 1995). In so holding, we determine that the record supports the ALJÂ’s rejection of portions of the treating physicianÂ’s evaluation, the ALJÂ’s determination of LangÂ’s residual functional capacity, and the ALJÂ’s characterization of LangÂ’s allegations of disabling pain as not credible; and we conclude that the ALJ adequately incorporated all of LangÂ’s disabilities in posing the hypothetical question to the vocational expert. See Boyd v. Apfel , 239 F.3d 698, 707 (5th Cir. 2001); Spellman v. Shalala , 1 F.3d 357, 364-65 (5th Cir. 1993); Wren v. Sullivan , 925 F.2d 123, 128-29 (5th Cir. 1991).

Lang has not established that any error committed by the magistrate judge constitutes reversible error. This court reviews the CommissionerÂ’s decision for propriety. See Ripley , 67 F.3d at 555.

Finally, the evidence did not show that LangÂ’s ability to maintain employment would be compromised despite his ability to perform employment as an initial matter, and there is no indication that the ALJ did not understand that an ability to maintain employment is inherent in the definition of residual functional capacity. See Dunbar v. Barnhart , 330 F.3d 670, 672 (5th Cir. 2003). Consequently, the ALJ was not required to make a specific finding with regard to LangÂ’s ability to maintain employment. See Dunbar , 330 F.3d at 672.

AFFIRMED.

No. 03-51346