
USCA1 Opinion

	




          February 4, 1993      [NOT FOR PUBLICATION]                            UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS                                FOR THE FIRST CIRCUIT                                 ___________________          No. 92-2095                                                VITO MALDERO,                                Plaintiff, Appellant,                                          v.                       SECRETARY OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES,                                 Defendant, Appellee.                                  __________________                     APPEAL FROM THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT                          FOR THE DISTRICT OF MASSACHUSETTS                     [Hon. William G. Young, U.S. District Judge]                                             ___________________                                 ___________________                                        Before                                Selya, Cyr and Boudin,                                   Circuit Judges.                                   ______________                                 ___________________               Vito Maldero on brief pro se.               ____________               A.  John  Pappalardo,  United  States  Attorney,  William L.               ____________________                              __________          Parker, Special  Assistant United States Attorney,  and Jessie M.          ______                                                  _________          Klyce, Assistant Regional Counsel, Region I, Department of Health          _____          and Human Services, on brief for appellee.                                  __________________                                 __________________                       Per  Curiam.     We agree  with  the June  30, 1992                      ___________            district  court  opinion  and  affirm  for substantially  the            reasons stated therein.                      We reject claimant's argument  that the ALJ did not            sufficiently develop the record because  he did not obtain VA            and other  records claimant has  now presented for  the first            time on appeal.   The ALJ  had sufficient records,  including            reports from  treating and consulting physicians,  to make an            informed  decision and  inadequate reason  to believe  the VA            records would  add significantly to  the information  already            presented.    We  have  reviewed  the  records  claimant  has            presented  for the  first time  on appeal  and conclude  they            would  not likely  have made a  difference.  A  remand is not            warranted.  Evangelista v. Secretary,  826 F.2d 136 (1st Cir.                        ___________    _________            1987).                      Affirmed.                      ________
