52 F.3d 330

Jackie Payton appeals the district court’s denial of Payton’s application on behalf of her child for supplemental security income benefits. For reversal, Payton argues the Secretary’s decision that her child is not disabled within the meaning of the Social Security Act is not supported by substantial evidence on the record as a whole. We disagree. After a careful review of the record and the parties’ briefs, we are satisfied the child, who suffers from an attention deficit disorder and a learning disability, does not satisfy the requirements for a listed impairment. We are also satisfied the child does not have the equivalent of a listed impairment. Because an opinion would have no precedential value in this fact-intensive case, we affirm without an opinion. See 8th Cir. R. 47B.