* 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 R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5 TH C IR .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. 97-50793 Summary Calendar GILBERTO RODRIGUEZ, 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. SA-96-CV-1058 August 28, 1998 Before HIGGINBOTHAM, JONES, and DENNIS, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM: * Gilberto Rodriguez appeals from a judgment affirm i ng the decision of the Commissioner of Social Security denying RodriguezÂ’s claim for disability insurance be nefits. He argues that the administrative law judge (ALJ) did not consider all of RodriguezÂ’s impairmen ts or their combined effect and that the ALJÂ’s decision was not supported by substantial evidence in the record. He further argues that the ALJ erred in relying on the medicalvocational guidelines without eliciting testimony from the vocational expert present at the hearing.

Our review of the record reveals that the ALJ considered all o f RodriguezÂ’s impairments, including their combined effect, and that the ALJÂ’s determination that Rodriguez could perform sedentary work was supported by substantial evidence. S ee Legget v. Chater , 67 F.3d 558, 564 (5th Cir. 1995). RodriguezÂ’s ability to perform sedentary work, his age, his educati on, and his work experience matched the criteria set forth in the medical -vocational guidelines, see 20 C.F.R. Pt. 404, Subpt. P., App. 2, Table 1, Rule 201.19, and the ALJ did not err i n relying on the guidelines without consideration of the vocational expert. S ee Scott v. Shalala , 30 F.3d 33, 34 (5th Cir. 1994).

AFFIRMED.

No. 97-50793