Vandi v. Barnhart

* Pursuant to 5TH CIR. 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that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent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 5TH CIR.
R. 47.5.4.
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT
No. 02-30494
Summary Calendar
PAMELA VANDI,
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 Louisiana
USDC No. 01-CV-1705
--------------------
March 11, 2003
Before DAVIS, WIENER, and EMILIO M. GARZA, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:*
Pamela Vandi appeals from the district court's dismissal
of her complaint challenging the denial of an application for
supplemental security income benefits. The district court
dismissed the complaint for Vandi's failure to file a brief as
ordered. Vandi does not directly address the district court's
dismissal in what she has labeled a "Token Brief." Although

-- 1 of 2 --

No. 02-30494
-2-
pro se pleadings are afforded liberal construction, Haines
v. Kerner, 404 U.S. 519, 520 (1972), even pro se litigants must
adequately brief arguments in order to preserve them. Yohey
v. Collins, 985 F.2d 222, 224-25 (5th Cir. 1993); see also
FED. R. APP. P. 28(a). Although Vandi asserts that the
Commissioner has wrongfully withheld medical records from her
which precluded her from filing a "meaningful" brief in the
district court or in this court, her contention is conclusional
and speculative, at best, and unsupported by the record. Vandi
has failed to adequately brief any issue on appeal. Yohey,
985 F.2d at 224-25.
AFFIRMED.

-- 2 of 2 --