20 C.F.R. § 404.1520

Section 404.1520 requires an ALJ at step two to determine whether a claimant has a severe impairment that significantly limits the claimant's physical or mental ability to do basic work activities.

Vavrek v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2025-09-08(a)(4)(ii), (c)

An ALJ evaluates the severity of a claimant’s impairments at Step Two of the sequential evaluation. 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520(a)(4)(ii). ... An impairment is considered severe if it “significantly limits [an individual’s] physical or mental ability to do basic work activities.” 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520(c). ... Reversal is required because the ALJ did not apply the correct legal standards when he concluded that Plaintiff’s migraine headaches are nonsevere.

At step two, an impairment is severe only if it significantly limits a claimant's physical or mental ability to perform basic work activities.

SANDERSON v. COMMISSIONER OF SOCIAL SECURITY · filed 2025-10-08(c)

Although Plaintiff highlights the “mild degenerative changes” seen in a November 202 limaging study, the ALJ properly focused on assessing any functional limitations flowing from Plaintiffs right wrist injury to determine if that impairment “significantly limits” his physical ability to perform basic work activities. R. 43-44; see also 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520(c).

Section 404.1520 requires an ALJ at step two to determine whether a claimant has a severe impairment or combination of impairments, meaning one that significantly limits basic work abilities.

Moumen v. Kijakazi · filed 2025-10-09(a)(4)(i), (c)

The second step of the Social Security Act’s sequential disability analysis requires an ALJ to determine whether a claimant has a medically severe impairment or combination of impairments. 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520(a)(4)(i). An impairment is considered severe only if it “significantly limits an individual’s physical or mental abilities to do basic work activities.” Id. § 404.1520(c).

Section 404.1520(c) requires an impairment or combination of impairments to significantly limit a claimant’s ability to perform basic work activities at step two; absent such an impairment, the claimant is not disabled.

Zeigler · filed 2025-10-28(c)

Second, the ALJ must determine whether the claimant has a medically determinable impairment or a combination of impairments that significantly limits the claimant’s ability to perform basic work activities. 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1520(c), 416.920(c). Absent such impairment, the claimant may not claim disability. Id. ... Accordingly, because the ALJ’s step-two finding was supported by substantial evidence, this Court will not second-guess it.

Section 404.1520(c) treats an impairment or combination of impairments as severe at Step Two when it significantly limits the claimant's physical or mental ability to perform basic work activities.

Rodriguez · filed 2025-11-07(c)

An impairment or combination of impairments is “severe” at Step Two if it “significantly limits [the claimant's] physical or mental ability to do basic work activities[.]” 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520(c).

Section 404.1520 requires an ALJ to determine at Step Two whether a claimant has a medically determinable impairment that significantly limits the ability to do basic work activities.

Preputnik v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2025-11-17(a)(4)(ii), (c)

At Step Two of the sequential evaluation process, an ALJ must determine whether a claimant’s medically determinable impairment is a “severe” impairment. See 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520(a)(4)(ii). A “severe” impairment is one that “significantly limits [a claimant’s] physical or mental ability to do basic work activities[.]” 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520(c).

At step two, the disability inquiry asks whether the claimant has a severe impairment or a combination of impairments that is severe and meets the duration requirement.

Greer v. Bisignano · filed 2025-09-22(a)(4)(ii)

In the agency’s five-step, sequential evaluation process, step two asks “whether the claimant has a severe impairment” or “a combination of impairments that is severe and meets the duration requirement.” Fetting, 62 F.4th at 336 (quoting Clifford v. Apfel, 227 F.3d 863, 868 (7th Cir. 2000)); 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520(a)(4)(ii).

Section 404.1520(a)(4) requires an ALJ to consider at step two whether a claimant has a severe impairment.

Gerndt · filed 2025-12-18(a)(4)

An ALJ must consider at step two of the sequential analysis whether a claimant has a severe impairment. 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1520(a)(4), 416.920(a)(4).

Section 404.1520(c) requires the ALJ to determine at step two whether a medically determinable impairment is severe or non-severe, but omitting an impairment is harmless when the ALJ finds at least one other severe impairment and proceeds through the sequential analysis.

CIESLAK · filed 2025-12-22(c)

“At step two, an ALJ is required to determine[:] (1) whether an impairment is medically determinable[;] and if so (2) whether that medically determinable impairment is severe or non-severe.” Robert E. v. Comm’r of Soc. Sec., No. 20-6882, 2021 WL 5277193, at *6 (D.N.J. Nov. 12, 2021); 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520(c). ... Here, the ALJ found in Plaintiff’s favor at step two in finding that Plaintiff had multiple severe impairments. Therefore, any omission of conversion disorder at step two is harmless error ... and is not a basis for reversal or remand.

At step two, § 404.1520(c) treats an impairment as severe only when it significantly limits a claimant’s physical or mental ability to do basic work activities, using a de minimis threshold.

Frederick T. v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2025-12-29(c)

A “severe” impairment is one which—either on its own or in combination with other impairments—“significantly limit[s] [a claimant’s] physical or mental ability to do basic work activities.” 42 U.S.C. § 423(d)(2)(B); 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520(c). The burden to prove an impairment is severe is not exacting: claimants “need only demonstrate something beyond ‘a slight abnormality or a combination of slight abnormalities which would have no more than a minimal effect on an individual’s ability to work.’” McRea, 370 F.3d at 360 (quoting SSR 85-28, 1985 WL 56856, at *3 (Jan. 1, 1985)). The Step Two inquiry thus operates as “a de minimis screening device to dispose of groundless claims.” Newell v. Comm’r of Soc. Sec., 347 F.3d 541, 546 (3d Cir. 2003).

At step two, § 404.1520(c) treats an impairment as severe when it significantly limits a claimant's physical or mental ability to do basic work activities.

Gipple · filed 2026-01-09(c)

During step two, whether evaluating a physical or mental impairment, the ALJ must first “determine whether [a claimant] ha[s] a medically determinable . . . impairment[]” that “result[s] from anatomical, physiological, or psychological abnormalities that can be shown by medically acceptable clinical and laboratory diagnostic techniques.” ... If the ALJ determines the claimant suffers from a medically determinable mental impairment, the ALJ must next decide whether the impairment is severe by evaluating the degree of functional limitation caused by the impairment. ... An impairment is severe if it “significantly limits [the claimant’s] physical or mental ability to do basic work activities,”—such as “[u]nderstanding, carrying out, and remembering simple instructions; . . . [d]ealing with changes in a routine work setting.” ... I recommend finding that the ALJ erred in failing to include any mental impairments at step two and any mental limitations in Plaintiff's RFC.

At step two, § 404.1520(c) requires an ALJ to determine whether a claimant has a severe medically determinable impairment or combination of severe impairments.

BOWERS · filed 2026-01-26(c)

As for Clifford B.'s argument that even if his shoulder issues were not severe the ALJ was still required to consider them in connection with his RFC, the Court acknowledges that the ALJ "must determine whether or not the claimant has a medically determinable impairment that is 'severe' or a combination of impairments that is 'severe.'" 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520(c). Further, an ALJ's decision must be based on consideration of all relevant evidence and her conclusions must be stated in a manner sufficient to permit an informed review. Garfield v. Schweiker, 732 F.2d 605, 610 (7th Cir. 1984). Here, the ALJ recognized the medical evidence of shoulder pain and noted "[a]s to precipitating and aggravating factors, I have taken these matters into account in assessing the claimant's [RFC]." [Filing No. 9-2 at 35.] She then explained that "given [Clifford B.'s] status post lung resection and chemotherapy for lung cancer, as well as his neuropathy, I restricted the claimant to the full range of light work, to reduce stressors from greater exertional demands and consistent with his level of activities of daily living as set forth in [a Function Report] and in his hearing testimony." [Filing No. 9-2 at 35.] This minimal articulation indicating that she considered the combination of Clifford B.'s symptoms and conditions is sufficient. See Orlando v. Heckler, 776 F.2d 209, 213 (7th Cir. 1985) ("We examine the [ALJ's] opinion as a whole to ascertain whether [she] considered all of the relevant evidence, made the required determinations, and gave supporting reasons for [her] decisions."). Based on the lack of testimony regarding shoulder issues, the lack of medical evidence indicating that shoulder issues warranted a more limited RFC, and the fact that the ALJ acknowledged and considered the limited evidence relating to shoulder issues, the Court finds that the ALJ sufficiently considered Clifford B.'s shoulder issues and that remand is not warranted.

Section 404.1520 requires a claimant to have a severe impairment at step two, and provides that a claimant without one is not disabled.

Mick · filed 2026-01-26(a)(4)(ii), (c)

At step two of the sequential evaluation, an ALJ considers whether a claimant has “a severe medically determinable physical or mental impairment that [has lasted or is expected to last for a continuous period of at least 12 months or result in death], or a combination of impairments that is severe and meets the duration requirement.” 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520(a)(4)(ii); 20 C.F.R. § 404.1509. “An impairment or combination of impairments is not severe if it does not significantly limit [a claimant’s] physical or mental ability to do basic work activities.” 20 C.F.R. § 404.1522(a). Similarly, Social Security Ruling (“SSR”) 85-28 provides that “[t]he severity requirement cannot be satisfied when medical evidence shows that the person has the ability to perform basic work activities, as required in most jobs.” SSR 85-28, 1985 WL 56856, at *3). These activities include “walking, standing, sitting, lifting, pushing, pulling, reaching, carrying or handling; seeing, hearing, and speaking; understanding, carrying out, and remembering simple instructions; use of judgment, responding appropriately to supervision, coworkers, and usual work situations; and dealing with changes in a routine work setting.” Id. If a claimant does not have a severe impairment, the claimant is not disabled. 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520(c).

At step two, the ALJ must determine whether a claimant has a severe impairment.

Escarra v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2025-09-29(a)(4)(ii)

Step two of the sequential evaluation process requires the ALJ to determine whether a claimant suffers from a severe impairment. See 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520(a)(4)(ii).

Section 404.1520 requires an ALJ at Step Two to decide whether a medically determinable impairment is severe, meaning it significantly limits the claimant's physical or mental ability to do basic work activities.

Woodhull · filed 2026-02-09(a)(4)(ii), (c)

At Step Two, an ALJ must determine whether a claimant’s medically determinable impairment is a “severe” impairment. See 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520(a)(4)(ii). A “severe” impairment is one that “significantly limits [a claimant’s] physical or mental ability to do basic work activities[.]” 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520(c).

Section 404.1520(c) treats an impairment as severe when it significantly limits a claimant’s physical or mental ability to do basic work activities.

Barron · filed 2026-02-23(c)

At step two, ALJ Davis found Plaintiff’s migraines to be a severe impairment, which means the migraines “significantly limit[ ] [Plaintiff’s] physical or mental ability to do basic work activities.” 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1520(c), 416.920(c). At no point, however, did the ALJ explain what those limitations are or how the RFC assessment for medium exertional work accounts for those limitations.

At step two, § 404.1520 requires an ALJ to determine whether the claimant has a medically determinable impairment or combination of impairments and whether it is severe.

Waligora · filed 2026-02-27(a)(4)(ii)

At step two, an ALJ must determine whether the claimant has any medically determinable impairments or combination of impairments, and if so, whether they are “severe.” 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520(a)(4)(ii).

Section 404.1520(c) treats an impairment as severe when it significantly limits a claimant’s physical or mental ability to do basic work activities.

Fields · filed 2026-03-12(c)

A severe impairment is defined as “any impairment or combination of impairments which significantly limits your physical or mental ability to do basic work activities,” 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1520(c), 416.920(c), and which lasts or can be expected to last “for a continuous period of not less than 12 months,” 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1509, 416.909.

Under § 404.1520, a finding of no impairment at step two ends the disability evaluation; a finding of severe impairment allows it to continue.

Benito RODRIGUEZ, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Otis R. BOWEN, M.D., Secretary of Health and Human Services, Defendant-Appelle · filed 1988-10-14

Such a complaint is of little moment since a finding of severe impairment was to Rodriguez’s advantage.

Section 404.1520 requires the ALJ to determine at step two whether a claimant has a severe impairment that significantly limits basic work activities.

Williams v. Astrue · filed 2011-05-19(a)(4)(ii), (c)

At step two of the disability analysis, the ALJ must determine whether a claimant has a severe impairment. 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520(a)(4)(ii). To determine whether a claimant’s impairment is severe, an ALJ must determine whether the impairment “significantly limits [the claimant’s] physical or mental ability to do basic work activities.” 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520(c); SSR 96-3p, 1996 WL 374181 (July 2, 1996).

At step two, § 404.1520 requires deciding whether the claimant has a severe impairment or a severe combination that meets the duration requirement, and the evaluation proceeds after at least one severe impairment is found.

Wurst v. Astrue · filed 2012-05-30(a)(4)(ii)

At step two the ALJ must determine whether a claimant has a “severe medically determinable physical or mental impairment that meets the duration requirement in § 404.1509, or a combination of impairments that is severe and meets the duration requirement.” 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520(a)(4)(ii). ... The Seventh Circuit recently explained “[a]s long as the ALJ determines that the claimant has one severe impairment, the ALJ will proceed to the remaining steps of the evaluation process” and referred to step two as a “threshold requirement.” ... Rather, the case at bar is virtually indistinguishable from Castile and Eskew and dictates a similar conclusion: the ALJ did not err when she determined which of Claimant’s impairments were severe and continued on in the evaluative process based on finding at least one severe impairment. ... The ALJ’s analysis at step two was not erroneous.

Section 404.1520 requires the Commissioner to determine at step two whether the claimant has a severe impairment or combination of impairments.

Hartman v. Colvin · filed 2013-06-19(a)(4)(ii)

At step 2 of the sequential evaluation process, the Commissioner determines which impairments presented by a claimant are severe. See 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1520(a)(4)(ii), 416.920(a)(4)(ii). This second step of the disability analysis, as noted, is a di mini-mus hurdle. Higgs, 880 F.2d at 862, which is designed merely to screen out totally groundless claims. Farris v. Sec’y of HHS, 773 F.2d 85, 89 (6th Cir.1985).

Section 404.1520 requires a claimant at step two to show a severe medically determinable impairment during the relevant period.

Lindstrom v. SSA · filed 2017-01-30(a)(4)(ii)

At Step Two, the claimant must show that she had a severe medically determinable impairment during the relevant period, which is from the alleged onset date through her last insured date.

At step two, an impairment is severe if it significantly limits a claimant’s ability to do basic work activities.

Armstrong v. Kijakazi · filed 2023-02-24(c)

At step two of the sequential evaluation, the issue is whether the claimant suffers from at least one “severe” medically determinable impairment. An impairment is “severe” if it ... “significantly limits [a claimant’s] physical or mental ability to do basic work activities.”

At step two, a claimant without a severe medically determinable impairment is found not disabled, and the evaluation ends.

Escobedo v. Commissioner of Social Security Administration · filed 2024-03-08(a)(4)(ii)

At step two, the ALJ determines whether the claimant has a “severe” medically determinable physical or mental impairment. § 404.1520(a)(4)(ii). If not, the claimant is not disabled and the inquiry ends. ... Accordingly, the Court finds that the ALJ’s decision on this issue is supported by substantial evidence.

At step two, failing to classify an impairment as severe can be harmless when another severe impairment carries the evaluation forward, but wrongly excluding an impairment as not medically determinable can require reversal when it is omitted from later steps.

Sexton v. Social Security Administration · filed 2024-03-08(a)(4)(ii)

Generally, an error in finding an impairment severe at step two is harmless if the ALJ finds the claimant has at least one severe impairment and proceeds to the next steps. ... But, the error here is not that the ALJ failed to find CPS severe—it is that the ALJ ruled CPS could not be a medically determinable impairment at all. ... Here, the ALJ did not consider CPS beyond step two. ... Thus, the ALJ committed reversible error.

At step two, an ALJ considers whether the claimant has a severe impairment or combination of impairments that meets the twelve-month duration requirement.

Woodard v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2024-03-18(a)(4)(ii)

At the second step of the sequential evaluation, an ALJ considers whether the claimant has at least one severe impairment or combination of impairments that meets the twelve-month durational requirement for establishing disability. See 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520(a)(4)(ii).

The sequential evaluation may stop at step two when the claimant fails to establish an impairment.

Diggs v. Commissioner, Social Security · filed 2024-04-01(a)(4)(ii)

Thus, the ALJ properly halted at step two, having found no impairments.

At step two, a severe impairment significantly limits a claimant’s ability to perform basic work activities.

Molnar v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2024-04-03(c)

The regulations define a severe impairment as one that significantly limits the ability to perform basic work activities. 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520(c).

Section 404.1520 requires a five-step disability evaluation and treats step two as a de minimis screen for groundless claims.

McCrea v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2004-05-27(c)

We now focus our attention on step two, the point at which the ALJ denied McCrea’s application for benefits. ... 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1520(c), 416.920(c); see also id. §§ 404.1521(a), 416.921(a) (“An impairment or combination of impairments is not severe if it does not significantly limit your physical or mental ability to do basic work activities.”). ... The burden placed on an applicant at step two is not an exacting one. ... In short, “[t]he step-two inquiry is a de minimis screening device to dispose of groundless claims.” ... Based on the foregoing, we hold that McCrea’s application for disability benefits does not fall within the category of “groundless claims” that step two of the Commissioner’s five-step sequential evaluation process was designed to remove from consideration.

At step two, § 404.1520(c) requires a severity determination for medically determinable impairments; failing to decide whether an alleged impairment is medically determinable can require reversal.

Sutton v. O'Malley · filed 2024-08-01(c)

After finding an MDI, the Commissioner must then determine whether that MDI is “severe” when evaluating step two of the above-referenced five-step evaluation process. ... Thus, failing to determine whether a claimant’s alleged impairment constitutes an MDI is reversible error.

At step two, a severe impairment must significantly limit the claimant’s ability to perform basic work activities.

Colvin v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2025-09-23(c)

A severe impairment is an “impairment or combination of impairments which significantly limits your physical or mental ability to do basic work activities”. §404.1520(c). ... For all these reasons, ALJ Cordovani’s determination that plaintiff was not under a severe impairment or combination of impairments is supported by substantial evidence.

A claimant needs only one severe impairment to proceed past step two; proving that additional impairments are severe does not advance the claim at that stage.

Sabella · filed 2025-12-18(a)(4)(ii)

Thus, because Sabella already established at least one severe impairment (three, in fact) and thus prevailed at step two, attempting to establish the severity of other, additional impairments would not carry his claim any further forward.

At step two, a claimant need show only one severe impairment; once one is found, the ALJ may not deny benefits at that step and must continue to the next step.

Iven v. Social Security Administration · filed 2023-06-01(a)(4)(ii)

Tenth Circuit precedent makes clear that “a claimant [need] show only ‘a severe’ impairment—that is, one severe impairment—to avoid a denial of benefits at step two.” Allman v. Colvin, 813 F.3d 1326, 1330 (10th Cir. 2016) (citing 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520(a)(4)(ii)). “As long as the ALJ finds one severe impairment, the ALJ may not deny benefits at step two but must proceed to the next step.” Id. As ALJ Richter found other impairments were severe, any failure to find mental limitations “severe at step two is not reversible error . . . .” See id. The undersigned recommends denying the motion on this issue.

Section 404.1520(c) requires the Commissioner to treat an impairment as severe when it significantly limits basic work activities and to proceed beyond step two unless the impairment is only a slight abnormality with no more than a minimal effect.

Hieb v. Commissioner Social Security Administration · filed 2023-06-02(c)

At step two, the ALJ determines whether the claimant’s medically determinable impairment or combination of impairments is severe. 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1520(a)(4)(ii), 416.920(a)(4)(ii). Step two is a de minimis screening device used to dispose of groundless claims. Bowen, 482 U.S. at 153–54. An impairment is severe if it “significantly limits the claimant’s ability to do basic work activities.” 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1520(c), 416.920(c). “An impairment is not severe if it is merely a ‘slight abnormality (or combination of slight abnormalities) that has no more than a minimal effect on the ability to do basic work activities.’” Webb v. Barnhart, 433 F.3d 683, 686 (9th Cir. 2005) (quoting SSR 96-3p). ... Here, the ALJ concluded that Plaintiff did not have a severe impairment at step two and ended the sequential analysis. ... The ALJ erred in making this finding. ... Accordingly, the ALJ’s finding at step two is not supported by substantial evidence.

Section 404.1520(c) requires a claimant to have a severe impairment that significantly limits the claimant’s physical or mental ability to perform basic work activities.

Fletcher v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2022-02-25(c)

As described above, at Step Two, the ALJ must determine whether the claimant has a severe impairment that significantly limits his or her physical or mental abilities to do basic work activities. 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520(c).

At step two, § 404.1520(c) asks whether the claimant has a severe impairment or combination of impairments that significantly limits the ability to do basic work activities.

BOSWELL v. COMMISSIONER OF SOCIAL SECURITY · filed 2022-02-25(c)

At step two, an ALJ determines whether the claimant has a “severe impairment” or combination of impairments that “significantly limits [her] physical or mental ability to do basic work activities[.]” 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520(c). “The step-two inquiry is a de minimis screening device to dispose of groundless claims.”

Section 404.1520(a)(4)(ii) requires an ALJ at step two to determine whether the claimant has a severe impairment or combination of impairments.

CROUCH v. SAUL · filed 2022-02-25(a)(4)(ii)

At Step Two of the sequential process, ALJs are required to determine whether the claimant has an impairment or combination of impairments that are "severe." 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520(a)(4)(ii).

At step two, if the ALJ finds at least one severe impairment, classifying additional impairments as nonsevere is generally immaterial because the claim proceeds to the next step.

Calvert v. Commissioner of the Social Security Administration · filed 2022-07-18(c)

When, as here, the ALJ finds at least one impairment to be severe, whether he finds other diagnoses to be severe at this step is largely irrelevant. See 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520(c) (the relevant inquiry at step 2 is whether “you do not have any” severe impairments); 404.1545(a)(2) (RFC determination not affected by severe/non-severe distinction); Martinez v. Astrue, No. 11-850, 2012 WL 3580675, at *10 (D.S.C. July 30, 2012) (“A finding of a single severe impairment at step two of the sequential evaluation is enough to ensure that the factfinder will progress to step three.”). Here, the ALJ found that Plaintiff had two severe impairments and then proceeded with the sequential evaluation process. Tr. 15. Thus, any perceived error in finding Plaintiff’s obesity to be a nonsevere impairment would be harmless.

Section 404.1520 requires disability claims to be evaluated through a five-step sequential process, and an error in identifying impairments at step two is harmless when the ALJ considers all impairments at later steps.

Hutson v. Social Security Administration, Commissioner · filed 2023-03-24(a)(4)(ii)

The Social Security Administration (“SSA”) employs a five-step sequential analysis to determine an individual’s eligibility for disability benefits. 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520(a)(4). ... Step two of the sequential evaluation undertaken by an ALJ serves as a “filter or “screen” to weed out claims involving no severe impairment or combination of impairments. ... However, if a case advances beyond step two, an ALJ must consider all impairments, severe or not, at later steps of the sequential evaluation. ... Accordingly, where an ALJ commits error at step two, the error is harmless, provided the ALJ considers all impairments, severe or not, at later steps of the sequential evaluation.

At step two under § 404.1520(a)(4)(ii), the ALJ must carefully assess whether the claimant’s impairments, considered in combination, significantly limit basic work activities before ending the sequential evaluation.

DEVITA · filed 2025-12-23(a)(4)(ii)

The Commissioner has promulgated a five-step, sequential analysis for evaluating a claimant’s disability, as outlined in 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520(a)(4). ... At step two, the ALJ considers whether the claimant has any “severe medically determinable physical or mental impairment” that meets certain regulatory requirements. Id. §§ 404.1520(a)(4)(ii), 416.920(a)(4)(ii). ... If he has such an impairment, the ALJ moves on to step three. ... On appeal, Plaintiff contends that the ALJ erred when she found that Plaintiff did not have any severe neurological or headache impairment, thereby ending the sequential analysis at step two, and requests that the Court vacate the ALJ’s decision and remand the matter for further administrative proceedings. The Court agrees. ... The ALJ was required to “assess the impact of the combination of [Plaintiff’s] impairments on [his] ability to function.” SSR 85-28, 1985 WL 56856, at *3. ... Yet the ALJ failed to undertake this careful evaluation. ... This, too, requires remand, especially given that any doubts as to whether Plaintiff has met his burden at step two must be resolved in his favor.4 See McCrea, 370 F.3d at 360.

Section 404.1520(c) treats an impairment as severe at step two when it significantly limits the claimant’s ability to perform basic work activities, but a severe-impairment finding alone does not require a particular RFC restriction.

Burnett v. Commissioner of the Social Security Administration · filed 2020-09-29(c)

To be a severe impairment at step two, the ALJ must have concluded that [Plaintiff]’s fibromyalgia significantly limited her ability to perform basic work activities.” Dowell, 2015 WL 1524767, at *3 (citing 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1520(c), 416.920(c)). Although a finding at step two that a claimant has a severe impairment does not automatically require a corresponding restriction in the RFC determination, the court in the instant case cannot deduce whether the ALJ properly considered Burnett’s subjective complaints of fibromyalgia pain and fatigue in determining her RFC. See id.

At step two, an ALJ determines whether a claimant has a severe impairment meeting the duration requirement; if no severe impairment is found, the claimant is not disabled, and a severe impairment is one that significantly limits basic work activities.

ROY v. SAUL · filed 2021-08-25(a)(4)(ii)

At step two of that inquiry, ALJs must determine whether a claimant has “a severe medically determinable physical or mental impairment that meets the duration requirement in [20 C.F.R.] § 416.909, or a combination of impairments that is severe and meets the duration requirement.” Id. §§ 404.1520(a)(4)(ii), 416.920(a)(4)(ii). If no such impairment or combination of impairments is found at step two, the claimant will be found “not disabled.” Id. An impairment or combination of impairments is severe if it “significantly limits your physical or mental ability to do basic work activities.” McCrea v. Comm’r of Soc. Sec., 370 F.3d 357, 360 (3d Cir. 2004) (citations omitted). Only where an impairment “would have no more than a minimal effect on an individual’s ability to work” would the impairment be found not severe. Id. (citing SSR 85-28, 1985 WL 56856 (S.S.A. Jan. 1, 1985)). When a claimant shows that even one impairment or combination of impairments is severe at step two, the inquiry proceeds to step three. Salles v. Comm’r of Soc. Sec., 229 F. App’x 140, 145 n.2 (3d Cir. 2007).

At step two, the ALJ determines whether an impairment is severe, but failure to label an impairment severe is harmless when the ALJ considers its limitations in assessing residual functional capacity.

(SS) Moy v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2021-10-08(c)

“The step-two inquiry is a de minimis screening device to dispose of groundless claims.” ... At step two of the sequential evaluation, the ALJ determines which of claimant’s alleged impairments are “severe” within the meaning of 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520(c). “An impairment is not severe if it is merely ‘a slight abnormality (or combination of slight abnormalities) that has no more than a minimal effect on the ability to do basic work activities.’” ... However, the Commissioner is correct that any step two error is immaterial because the ALJ must consider all limitations in assessing a claimant’s RFC through “a narrative discussion describing how the evidence supports each conclusion, citing specific medical facts . . . and nonmedical evidence . . . .” ... Because the ALJ considered all symptoms in making her findings, AR 18-23, any step two error is harmless.

Section 404.1520(c) treats an impairment as severe at step two when it significantly limits a claimant’s physical or mental ability to do basic work activities, while step two serves only as a threshold screen before the RFC assessment.

Phillips v. Kijakazi · filed 2021-11-24(c)

First, the ALJ’s failure to consider one of Phillips’s conditions at step two was harmless error because the ALJ later considered it in determining Phillips’s RFC at step four. At step two, an impairment or combination of impairments is severe if it “significantly limits [a claimant’s] physical or mental ability to do basic work activities.” 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1520(c), 404.1552(a). “Step two is merely a threshold determination meant to screen out weak claims. It is not meant to identify the impairments that should be taken into account when determining the RFC.”

Section 404.1520 directs the Commissioner to find a claimant not disabled at step two when the claimant lacks a severe impairment, meaning an impairment that significantly limits basic work activities and meets the duration requirement.

Mardocco v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2022-01-14(a)(4)(ii) and (c)

At step two of the analysis, the ALJ must determine whether the claimant has a medically determinable impairment, or a combination of impairments, that is severe, meaning that it limits his or her ability to do basic work activities, and meets the duration requirement. 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520(a)(4)(ii) and (c); 416.920(a)(4)(ii) and (c). ... Plaintiff has not met her step two burden to demonstrate that her mental impairments were severe. Accordingly, the Court finds that substantial evidence supports the ALJ’s determination that plaintiffs mental impairments were non-severe.

Section 404.1520(c) treats an impairment as severe only when it significantly limits the claimant’s physical or mental abilities to do basic work activities.

Kowalski v. Saul · filed 2022-02-22(c)

An impairment is considered severe if it “significantly limits an individual’s physical or mental abilities to do basic work activities.” 20 C.F.R. 404.1520(c).

At step two, the regulation requires an ALJ to determine whether a medically determinable impairment is severe, meaning it significantly limits the claimant’s ability to perform basic work activities.

Brewer v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2022-02-23(c)

If an impairment is medically determinable, then an ALJ must determine whether it is severe. Id. A “severe impairment” is defined as “any impairment or combination of impairments which significantly limits [a claimant’s] physical or mental ability to do basic work activities.” 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520(c).

Section 404.1520 makes the step-two severity inquiry a threshold determination meant to screen out weak claims.

Pearson v. Kijakazi · filed 2022-04-15

The ALJ did not err at step two, as the ALJ was not required to find that six of Pearson’s impairments were severe, because the inquiry is “merely a threshold determination meant to screen out weak claims.” Buck v. Berryhill, 869 F.3d 1040, 1048–49 (9th Cir. 2017); see 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520.

At step two, finding any severe impairment favors the claimant and requires the ALJ to proceed while considering all impairments together at the later steps.

DAVIS v. COMMISSIONER OF SOCIAL SECURITY · filed 2022-05-02(c)

There is no error at step two, however, where an ALJ finds severe impairments and subsequently proceeds to the succeeding steps because the finding of a severe impairment is a ruling in the claimant’s favor at that step. ... The ALJ is then “required to consider all impairments, regardless of severity, in conjunction with one another in performing the latter steps of the sequential evaluation.”

At step two, an impairment is severe only if it significantly limits a claimant's physical or mental ability to do basic work activities.

Felt v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2022-05-12(c)

The claimant bears the burden of presenting evidence establishing severity at step two of the disability analysis. ... A severe impairment is one that significantly limits the plaintiff’s physical and/or mental ability to do basic work activities. See 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1520(c), 416.920(c); see also 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1521(a), 416.921(a) (noting that an impairment is not severe at step two if it does not significantly limit a claimant’s ability to do basic work activities). ... Accordingly, the ALJ’s analysis at step two provides sufficient explanation indicating that she adequately considered the evidence related to Plaintiff’s alleged impairments, including those she did not find to be severe. T. 14-15. See Reices-Colon v. Astrue, 523 F. App’x 796, 798 (2d Cir, 2013); Fuimo v. Colvin, 948 F. Supp. 2d 260, 269-70 (N.D.N.Y. 2013). Therefore, the ALJ had substantial evidence to support her conclusions at step two. In the alternative, the Court finds that any error by the ALJ at this step would be harmless because she did find other impairments severe, continued with the sequential evaluation, and provided adequate explanation in her decision showing she properly considered the evidence related to Plaintiff’s various impairments. Id. ... Therefore, for the reasons above, the ALJ’s findings regarding Plaintiff’s impairments at Step Two are supported by substantial evidence, and remand is not required on this basis.

At step two, the regulation does not require an administrative law judge to label every impairment as severe or non-severe.

Prater v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2022-05-31(a)(ii)

Notwithstanding, the regulations do not require an administrative law judge to designate each impairment as “severe” or “non-severe.” 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520(a)(ii).

Section 404.1520(c) requires the Commissioner to find a claimant not disabled at step two when the claimant's impairment does not significantly limit the ability to perform basic work activities.

Glanden v. O'Malley · filed 2022-06-09(c)

At step two of the sequential evaluation process, the ALJ considers the severity of the claimant’s medically determinable impairment or combination of impairments. 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520(a)(4)(ii). First, the claimant must prove the existence of a physical or mental impairment by providing medical evidence consisting of signs, symptoms, and laboratory findings; the claimant’s own statement of symptoms alone will not suffice. 20 C.F.R. § 404.1521. Second, the claimant must show the medically determinable impairment or combination of impairments are severe, i.e., significantly limit the claimant’s physical or mental ability to do basic work activities. 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520(c). ... The Court finds the ALJ’s determination that Plaintiff did not suffer a severe impairment, and is therefore, not disabled, is substantially supported by the lack of any evidence from the relevant time period. 20 C.F.R. § 404.1521. The Court need not address Plaintiff’s remaining issues because the analysis ends when a claimant is determined not disabled at step two. 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520(c).

Section 404.1520(c) requires the ALJ at step two to determine whether a claimant has a severe medically determinable impairment or combination of impairments.

Rogers v. Kijakazi · filed 2022-07-11(c)

At Step 2 the ALJ is tasked with determining whether a claimant has a medically determinable impairment that is severe, or a combination of impairments that are severe. See 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520(c); 20 C.F.R. § 416.920(c).

Section 404.1520(c) treats an impairment as severe when it significantly limits a claimant’s physical or mental ability to perform basic work activities.

LEATHERN v. COMMISSIONER OF SOCIAL SECURITY · filed 2022-07-31(c)

At Step Two, the ALJ determines whether a claimant has a medically severe impairment or combination of impairments. ... An impairment is considered severe if it “significantly limits an individual’s physical or mental abilities to do basic work activities.” 20 C.F.R. 404.1520(c). ... Applying these standards, the Court finds no harmful error in the ALJ’s Step Two analysis.

Section 404.1520 requires a step-two assessment of impairment severity, and an impairment is severe only when it significantly limits a claimant’s ability to do basic work activities.

Baumiller v. Commissioner of Social Security Administration · filed 2022-09-13(a)(4)(ii), (c)

In step two, the ALJ considers the severity of a claimant’s impairments. 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520(a)(4)(ii). A “severe” impairment is “any impairment or combination of impairments which significantly limit . . . [a claimant’s] physical or mental ability to do basic work activities.” Id. § 404.1520(c).

At step two, an ALJ need only find one severe impairment, but after proceeding beyond that step must consider the claimant’s entire medical condition, including impairments determined not to be severe.

Belanger v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2022-12-22(c)

At step two, the ALJ must determine whether the claimant has a medically determinable impairment that is “severe” or a combination of impairments that is “severe.” 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1520(c). The Eleventh Circuit has described this analysis “as a screening or filter to eliminate groundless claims.” Tuggerson-Brown v. Comm’r of Soc. Sec., 572 F. App’x 949, 951 (11th Cir. 2014). Important for present purposes, an ALJ need not identify every severe impairment. Id. “The finding of any severe impairment, based on either a single impairment or a combination of impairments, is enough to satisfy step two because once the ALJ proceeds beyond step two, he is required to consider the claimant’s entire medical condition, including impairments the ALJ determined were not severe.” Burgin v. Comm’r of Soc. Sec., 420 F. App’x 901, 902 (11th Cir. 2011).

At Step Two, § 404.1520(a)(4)(ii) requires the Commissioner to determine whether a claimant has a severe medically determinable impairment or combination of impairments that meets the twelve-month duration requirement.

Canis v. Kijakazi · filed 2023-02-06(a)(4)(ii)

At Step Two, the ALJ must determine whether the claimant has “a severe medically determinable physical or mental impairment,” or “a combination of impairments that is severe,” that lasted or is expected to last for at least twelve months. See 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1509, 404.1520(a)(4)(ii). “An impairment is not severe if it amounts only to a slight abnormality that ... would not significantly limit the claimant’s physical or mental ability to do basic work activities.” ... Here, the Court finds that the ALJ’s conclusion at step 2 that Plaintiff’s left post-inguinal hernia repair pain and ilio-inguinal neuralgia were not severe is supported by substantial evidence.

At step two, the regulation requires an ALJ to determine whether the claimant has a severe impairment, and before step four to use all relevant evidence, including severe and non-severe impairments, in formulating the RFC.

Claunch v. SSA · filed 2023-02-08

To recap, step two of the disability analysis requires an ALJ to determine whether the claimant suffers from any impairments that qualify as severe. 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520(a)(4)(ii). To qualify as severe, an “impairment or combination of impairments” must “significantly limit[] your physical or mental ability to do basic work activities . . . .” Id. § 404.1520(c). If the claimant suffers from no severe impairments, they are not disabled. Id. § 404.1520(a)(4)(ii). Prior to step four, the ALJ uses all the relevant evidence in the record, including both severe and non-severe impairments, to craft an RFC. Id. §§ 404.1520(e), 404.1545(a)(1)–(2).

Section 404.1520(a)(4)(ii) requires the ALJ to determine at step two whether the claimant has a severe impairment or combination of impairments.

Norman v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2023-03-06(a)(4)(ii)

As explained above, the ALJ’s task at step two of the disability analysis is to determine whether the claimant has an impairment, or a combination of impairments, that is “severe.” 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520(a)(4)(ii); id. § 416.921. Relevant here, a physical impairment is “severe” if it significantly limits the claimant’s ability to do “basic work activities,” such as walking, standing, sitting, lifting, pushing, pulling, reaching, carrying, or handling, among other things. Id. § 416.922.

At step two, the regulation requires the ALJ to determine whether the claimant has an impairment or combination of impairments that significantly restricts the ability to perform basic work activities.

Basabe v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2022-09-26(c)

At step two of the disability analysis, the ALJ determines whether the claimant has an impairment, or combination of impairments, that is “severe” within the meaning of the Act, in that it imposes significant restrictions on the claimant’s ability to perform basic work activities. 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520(c).

At step two, § 404.1520(a)(4)(ii) requires the ALJ to determine whether the claimant has a severe impairment.

Letourneau v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2023-03-16(a)(4)(ii)

Step two of the sequential evaluation process requires the ALJ to determine whether a claimant suffers from a severe impairment. See 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520(a)(4)(ii).

Section 404.1520(c) requires the ALJ to determine at step two which of the claimant's alleged impairments are severe, including by analyzing a documented impairment even if it may ultimately be found non-severe.

(SS) Strong v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2023-03-24(c)

At step two of the sequential evaluation, the ALJ determines which of claimant’s alleged impairments are “severe” within the meaning of 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520(c). ... Here, though the ALJ did determine plaintiff had some severe and some non-severe impairments, the ALJ entirely omitted plaintiff’s PTSD impairment at step two. ... The ALJ erred at step two by not including an analysis of plaintiff’s PTSD impairment.

At step two, § 404.1520(c) treats an impairment as severe only if it significantly limits a claimant’s physical or mental ability to perform basic work activities.

Young v. Kijakazi · filed 2023-03-27(c)

At step two of the sequential evaluation process, a claimant must prove that he has an impairment that is so severe that it “significantly limits [his] physical and mental ability to do basic work activities.” 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1520(c), 416.920(c); see also 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1522(a) (“An impairment or combination of impairments is not severe if it does not significantly limit your physical or mental ability to do basic work activities.”), 416.922(a) (same).

Section 404.1520(c) requires the step-two inquiry to determine whether an impairment is medically determinable and severe, with severity turning on significant limits to basic work activities; an erroneous non-severity finding may be harmless if the sequential evaluation continues and the RFC considers the impairment.

Kemp v. Commissioner Social Security Administration · filed 2023-04-13(c)

At step two, the ALJ determines whether the claimant has an impairment, or combination of impairments, that is both medically determinable and severe. 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520(c). An impairment is medically determinable if it is diagnosed by an acceptable medical source and based upon acceptable medical evidence. 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520(c). An impairment is severe if it significantly limits the claimant's ability to do basic work activities. 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520(c). ... Accordingly, the ALJ’s determination that Plaintiff’s mental health conditions was not severe was not supported by substantial evidence. Nevertheless, given that the ALJ continued the sequential evaluation process and formulated an RFC that considered evidence and allegations pertaining to plaintiff’s mental impairments, Tr. 22-25, any alleged error at step two is harmless.

Section 404.1520 requires the ALJ to determine at step two whether the claimant has a medically severe impairment, proceed to the next step when at least one severe impairment exists, and consider all impairments when assessing residual functional capacity.

Henson v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2023-05-01(a)(4)(ii), (c), (e)

Step Two of the administration’s evaluation process requires the ALJ to determine whether the claimant “has a medically severe impairment or combination of impairments.” ... So long as the ALJ determines that Plaintiff had at least one “severe” impairment or combination of impairments, the sequential analysis proceeds to step three, as was the case here. ... Notably, when the ALJ assesses the Plaintiff’s residual functional capacity—defined as his ability to do physical and mental work activities on a sustained basis despite limitations from his impairments—the ALJ must consider all of Plaintiff’s impairments, including impairments he found were not severe at step two. See, 20 CFR §§ 404.1520(e), 404.1545; SSR 96-8p.

Section 404.1520(c) requires a step-two determination of whether an alleged impairment is severe, and an impairment is not severe when it has no more than a minimal effect on basic work activities.

(SS) Rodriguez v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2023-06-12(c)

At step two of the sequential evaluation, the ALJ determines which of claimant’s alleged impairments are “severe” within the meaning of 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520(c). “An impairment is not severe if it is merely ‘a slight abnormality (or combination of slight abnormalities) that has no more than a minimal effect on the ability to do basic work activities.’” ... Because the record supports the ALJ’s findings that medication effectively controlled plaintiff’s migraines, the ALJ did not err.

At step two, § 404.1520(c)'s severity inquiry is a de minimis screen for whether an impairment imposes more than minimal limitations, and it is distinct from the separate twelve-month duration requirement.

Socciarelli v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2023-06-29(c)

At step two of the disability analysis, the ALJ determines whether the claimant has an impairment, or combination of impairments, that is “severe” within the meaning of the Act, in that it imposes significant restrictions on the claimant’s ability to perform basic work activities. ... Step two’s “severity” requirement is de minimis and is meant only to screen out the weakest of claims. ... However, the severity inquiry is distinct from the durational requirement.

Section 404.1520 requires an ALJ to evaluate impairment severity at Step Two and treats an impairment as severe when it significantly limits a claimant’s ability to perform basic work activities.

Search v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2023-08-29(a)(4)(ii), (c)

An ALJ evaluates the “medical severity” of a claimant’s impairments at Step Two of the sequential evaluation. 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520(a)(4)(ii.) An impairment or combination of impairments is “severe” if it “significantly limits [an individual’s] physical or mental ability to do basic work activities.”4 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520(c).

Section 404.1520(c) defines a severe impairment as one that significantly limits a claimant’s ability to do basic work activities, and finding one severe impairment requires proceeding beyond step two.

Fritz v. Commissioner of Social Security Administration · filed 2023-08-31(c)

An impairment is “severe” if it “significantly limits [a claimant’s] physical or mental ability to do basic work activities.” 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520(c). ... As long as the ALJ finds one severe impairment, she may not deny benefits at step two but must proceed to the next step.

At step two of the five-step disability evaluation, failing to list an impairment as severe is harmless when the ALJ considers it at later steps and the RFC is supported by substantial evidence.

Cotic v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2023-09-20(a)(4)(ii)

A five-step sequential analysis is used to evaluate disability claims. See 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1520, 416.920. ... Accordingly, the Court finds that, even assuming the ALJ erred by failing to list IBS and gastroparesis as severe impairments at step two of the sequential evaluation, she adequately considered those impairments at the later steps of the analysis. ... Consequently, viewing the ALJ’s decision as a whole, the Court finds that the ALJ’s failure to discuss Plaintiff’s IBS and gastroparesis at step two was harmless, and that the RFC finding is supported by substantial evidence.

Section 404.1520(c) requires a step-two determination of whether a claimant has a severe medically determinable impairment; if none exists, the claimant is not disabled, and if one exists, the evaluation proceeds to step three.

Sedor v. Commissioner Social Security Administration · filed 2023-10-06(c)

At step two, the ALJ must determine whether the claimant has a medically determinable impairment that is "severe" or a combination of impairments that is "severe" (20 CFR 404.1520(c)). An impairment or combination of impairments is "severe" within the meaning of the regulations if it significantly limits an individual’s ability to perform basic work activities. An impairment or combination of impairments is "not severe" when medical and other evidence establish only a slight abnormality or a combination of slight abnormalities that would have no more than a minimal effect on an individual’s ability to work (20 CFR 404.1522, Social Security Rulings (SSRs) 85-28 and 16-3p). If the claimant does not have a severe medically determinable impairment or combination of impairments, he is not disabled. If the claimant has a severe impairment or combination of impairments, the analysis proceeds to the third step.

Section 404.1520(a)(4)(ii) requires the ALJ to determine at step two whether the claimant has a severe impairment.

McKinnie v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2023-11-09(a)(4)(ii)

Before formulating an RFC, the ALJ must consider the medical severity of a claimant’s impairments. 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1520(a)(4)(ii), 416.920(a)(4)(ii). ... Therefore, to the extent Plaintiff seeks remand due to the ALJ’s failure to find that her obstructive sleep apnea was a severe impairment, any such error is harmless because the ALJ found that Plaintiff had other severe impairments and proceeded to step three of the sequential analysis (Tr. 13-15).

Section 404.1520(c) treats an impairment as severe when it significantly limits a claimant’s physical or mental ability to perform basic work activities.

Knutson v. Commissioner Social Security Administration · filed 2023-11-15(c)

An impairment or combination of impairments is “severe” if it significantly limits the claimant’s physical or mental ability to do basic work activities. 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1520(c), 416.920(c).

Section 404.1520(c) requires the ALJ at step two to determine whether a claimant has a severe impairment that significantly limits the claimant's physical or mental ability to perform basic work activities.

(SS) Vargas v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2024-02-16(c)

At step two of the sequential process, the ALJ must determine whether the claimant suffers from a “severe” impairment, i.e., one that significantly limits her physical or mental ability to do basic work activities. 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520(c).

At step two, § 404.1520(c) treats severity as a de minimis screen, and an ALJ's failure to label an impairment severe is harmless when the impairment is considered at later steps.

Froehlich v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2024-03-25(c)

At step two of the disability analysis, the ALJ determines whether the claimant has an impairment, or combination of impairments, that is “severe” within the meaning of the Act, in that it imposes significant restrictions on the claimant’s ability to perform basic work activities. 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1520(c), 416.920(c). ... Step two’s “severity” requirement is de minimis and is meant only to screen out the weakest of claims. ... Moreover, even if the ALJ’s failure to deem Plaintiff’s pulmonary condition to be severe was error, any error would be considered harmless if the ALJ continued on to consider the non-severe impairment at the subsequent steps of the analysis.

Section 404.1520(c) treats an impairment or combination of impairments as severe when it significantly limits a person's physical or mental ability to perform basic work activities.

Fernandez v. Commissioner of Social Security Administration · filed 2024-06-25(c)

“[A]ny impairment or combination of impairments which significantly limits [a person’s] physical or mental ability to do basic work activities” is considered “severe.” 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520(c). ... The Court thus concludes that the ALJ erred by finding that Plaintiff failed to meet his de minimis burden at step two.

Section 404.1520(c) requires an ALJ at step two to determine whether the claimant has a severe medically determinable impairment or a combination of severe impairments; one severe impairment is enough to satisfy step two.

Keene v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2024-07-22(c)

At step two, the ALJ must determine whether a claimant has a medically determinable impairment that is severe or a combination of impairments that are severe. 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1520(c) and 416.920. “This step acts as a filter; if no severe impairment is shown the claim is denied, but the finding of any severe impairment, whether or not it qualifies as a disability and whether or not it results from a single severe impairment or a combination of impairments that together qualify as severe, is enough to satisfy the requirement of step two.”

Section 404.1520(c) requires an ALJ to determine at step two whether the claimant has a severe impairment or combination of impairments that significantly limits basic work activities.

King v. Kijakazi · filed 2024-08-06(c)

At step two of the sequential evaluation process, the ALJ must determine whether the claimant has a medically determinable impairment that is “severe” or a combination of impairments that is “severe.” 20 CFR § 404.1520(c). An impairment or combination of impairments is “severe” within the meaning of the Regulations if it significantly limits a claimant’s physical or mental ability to perform basic work activities; conversely, an impairment is not severe if it does not significantly limit a claimant’s physical or mental ability to do basic work activities.

Section 404.1520(c) requires the ALJ at step two to determine whether a medically determinable impairment significantly limits the claimant's physical or mental ability to do basic work activities.

McClinton v. O'Malley · filed 2024-09-04(c)

At step two of the sequential process, the ALJ determines whether the claimant suffers from a “severe” impairment, i.e., one that significantly limits her physical or mental ability to do basic work activities. This involves a two-step process: 1) determining whether the claimant has a medically determinable impairment and 2), if so, determining whether the impairment is severe.

Section 404.1520(a)(4)(ii) requires the ALJ to determine at step two whether the claimant has a severe impairment.

Music v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2024-09-27(a)(4)(ii)

At step two, the ALJ must determine whether the claimant has a “severe” impairment. Smolen v. Chater, 80 F.3d 1273, 1290 (9th Cir. 1996). An impairment is severe if it significantly limits the claimant’s ability to perform basic work activities for at least 12 months. See 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1509; 404.1520(a)(4)(ii). Importantly, “the step-two severity threshold is not high.” Toledo v. Comm’r of Soc. Sec., 2024 WL 3029251, at *3 (E.D. Cal. June 17, 2024). This step serves as a de minimis screening device to filter out groundless claims. See Smolen, 80 F.3d at 1290. As such, a claimant need only make a minimal showing to pass this step, and a denial requires unambiguous evidence of no more than minimal limitations. See Glanden v. Kijakazi, 86 F.4th 838, 843-44 (9th Cir. 2023).

Section 404.1520(a)(4)(ii) requires the ALJ at step two to determine whether an impairment is severe because it significantly limits the claimant's ability to perform basic work activities for at least 12 months.

Burney v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2024-10-18(a)(4)(ii)

An impairment is severe if it significantly limits the claimant’s ability to perform basic work activities for at least 12 months. See 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1509; 404.1520(a)(4)(ii).

Section 404.1520(a)(4)(ii) requires an ALJ at step two to determine whether a claimant has a severe impairment or combination of impairments that meets the duration requirement.

Wernersbach v. Colvin · filed 2024-12-02(a)(4)(ii)

At step two of the five-step sequential process, an ALJ must determine whether a plaintiff has “a severe medically determinable physical or mental impairment that meets the [twelve-month duration requirement in §§ 404.1509 and 416.909], or a combination of impairments that is severe and meets the duration requirement.” 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1520(a)(4)(ii), 416.920(a)(4)(ii). To be severe, an impairment must “significantly limit[ ] [a plaintiff’s] physical or mental ability to do basic work activities.” Id. §§ 404.1520(c), 416.920(c).

At step two, § 404.1520 requires evaluating the medical severity of impairments and treats an impairment as severe when it significantly limits the claimant’s physical or mental ability to perform basic work activities.

Materu v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2025-02-11(a)(4)(ii), (c)

An ALJ evaluates the “medical severity” of a claimant’s impairments at Step Two of the sequential evaluation. 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520(a)(4)(ii.) An impairment or combination of impairments is “severe” if it “significantly limits [an individual’s] physical or mental ability to do basic work activities.” 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520(c). ... The undersigned concludes that the ALJ’s analysis is erroneous in two respects. First, it does not account for significant evidence that Plaintiff required many adjustments to her medications, and that she continued to exhibit and complain of significant anxiety and panic symptoms despite these changes. Second, the ALJ did not build the required logical bridge between his description of Plaintiff’s activities and his conclusions that those activities fail to support the claimed severity of her mental impairments. Given that any impairment that is more than a “slight abnormality” should be considered severe, the undersigned finds that the ALJ’s conclusions are not supported by substantial evidence.

Section 404.1520 requires an ALJ at step two to find a claimant's impairment severe only when it significantly limits the claimant's ability to perform basic work activities.

Thomas v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2025-03-03(a)(ii), (c)

At step two, an ALJ must determine whether plaintiff has a medically determinable impairment, or combination of impairments, that is “severe”. 20 C.F.R. §§404.1520(a)(ii); 416.920(a)(ii). A severe impairment is an “impairment or combination of impairments which significantly limits your physical or mental ability to do basic work activities”. §§404.1520(c); 416.920(c).

Section 404.1520 requires the Commissioner to use a five-step sequential evaluation, including determining at step two whether the claimant has a severe impairment.

Perhach v. O'Malley · filed 2025-03-13(a)(4)(ii), (c)

The Commissioner uses a five-step process, set forth in 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1520 and 416.920, to evaluate disability insurance and SSI disability claims. ... Furthermore, the failure to adduce medical testimony on migraines or at a minimum, to consider the evidence of ongoing migraines through the relevant period, and to classify migraines as a severe impairment at step two, as confirmed by Dr. Kendrick’s testimony, materially impacted the ALJ’s analysis, and was plain and prejudicial error.

At step two, § 404.1520(c) treats an impairment as severe when it significantly limits basic work activities, and the inquiry is a de minimis screen.

Ward v. O'Malley · filed 2025-04-10(c)

An impairment is considered severe if it “significantly limits an individual’s physical or mental abilities to do basic work activities,” 20 C.F.R. 404.1520(c), or if it is “something beyond ‘a slight abnormality which would have no more than a minimal effect on an individual’s ability to work.’” ... This Step 2 inquiry is a de minimis screening device used to cast out meritless claims. ... Given that low standard, we find these discussions suffice to show that sufficient evidence supported the ALJ’s finding that neither fatigue nor sleep deprivation were severe impairments.

Section 404.1520 requires an ALJ at step two to assess the medical severity of impairments and treat an impairment as severe when it significantly limits a claimant's ability to perform basic work activities.

Stephens v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2025-07-29(a)(4)(ii), (c)

At step two of the evaluation process, the ALJ “must consider the medical severity of [the claimant’s] impairments.” 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520(a)(4)(ii),(c). ... A severe impairment is “any impairment or combination of impairments which significantly limits [a claimant’s] physical or mental ability to do basic work activities.” 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520(c). ... This Court therefore finds the ALJ did not actually apply the correct legal standard in his severity findings.

Section 404.1520(c) requires an ALJ at step two to determine whether an impairment or combination of impairments is severe because it significantly restricts the claimant’s ability to perform basic work activities.

Nelson v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2025-09-10(c)

At step two of the disability analysis, the ALJ determines whether the claimant has an impairment, or combination of impairments, that is “severe” within the meaning of the Act, in that it imposes significant restrictions on the claimant’s ability to perform basic work activities. 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520(c). ... Thus, the Court concludes the ALJ’s determination that Plaintiff’s right ankle impairment was non-severe is not supported by substantial evidence.

Section 404.1520(c) treats an impairment as severe when it significantly limits a claimant’s physical or mental ability to perform basic work activities.

Gonzalez v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2025-09-23(c)

As noted above, a severe impairment is one that significantly limits the claimant’s physical or mental ability to do basic work activities. 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1520(c), 416.920(c). ... In sum, Plaintiff’s challenge to the ALJ’s step two severity analysis relies on her own interpretation of the medical evidence, which is counter to every medical opinion of record regarding her mental impairments. Under these circumstances, the Court finds no basis to disturb the Commissioner’s determination.

Section 404.1520(a)(4)(ii) requires the ALJ to assess at step two whether the claimant has a severe impairment or combination of impairments.

Seals · filed 2025-11-04(a)(4)(ii)

At step two, an ALJ considers the severity of a claimant’s impairments. 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520(a)(4)(ii). ... Based on the explanation provided by the ALJ, there is no indication he erred in finding Plaintiff’s impairments to be non-severe. Further, any error would be legally irrelevant because the ALJ considered all documented limitations from these impairments in formulating the RFC. Accordingly, Plaintiff’s first argument is without merit.

At step two, § 404.1520 requires the ALJ to assess the medical severity of the claimant's impairments, treating an impairment as severe when it significantly limits the claimant's physical or mental ability to do basic work activities.

Brown v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2025-09-30(a)(4)(ii), (c)

At step two of the five-step sequential analysis, the ALJ must assess the medical severity of a claimant’s impairments. 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1520(a)(4)(ii), 416.920(a)(4)(ii); see also Webb v. Barnhart, 433 F.3d 683, 686 (9th Cir. 2005). “[T]he step-two inquiry is a de minimis screening device to dispose of groundless claims.” Smolen v. Chater, 80 F.3d 1273, 1290 (9th Cir. 1996). ... An impairment or combination of impairments is considered “severe” if it “significantly limits [a claimant’s] physical or mental ability to do basic work activities.” 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1520(c), 416.920(c).

At Step 2, § 404.1520 requires an ALJ to assess the medical severity of a claimant’s impairments, treating an impairment as severe when it significantly limits the claimant’s physical or mental ability to do basic work activities.

FARIDANI · filed 2026-02-04(a)(4)(ii), (c)

At Step 2 of the sequential evaluation process, an ALJ considers “the medical severity” of a claimant’s impairments. 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520(a)(4)(ii). An impairment is severe if it “significantly limits” a claimant’s “physical or mental ability to do basic work activities.” Id. § 404.1520(c). Conversely, an impairment is not severe if it does not significantly limit a claimant’s ability to perform basic work activities. See id. § 404.1522(a). ... In his decision, the ALJ acknowledged the proper regulatory framework, discussed the Paragraph B criteria in detail, indicated that his RFC assessment accounted for the Plaintiff’s nonsevere mental impairments and the degree of limitation he found at Step 2, discussed and evaluated the Plaintiff’s alleged mental health symptoms in his RFC assessment, explained his reliance on the opinions of two medical experts who opined that the Plaintiff’s mental limitations were nonsevere, and explained his rejection of the opinions of two medical experts who opined that the Plaintiff had more significant mental health limitations. No more was required to satisfy the regulatory requirements outlined above.

Section 404.1520 requires an ALJ to use a five-step disability evaluation, including a step-two determination of whether the claimant has a severe impairment that meets the duration requirement.

Palmer v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2026-02-05(a)(4)(ii)

The Social Security regulations outline a five-step sequential evaluation process for determining whether a claimant is disabled. 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520(a)(4)(i)–(v), (b)–(g). ... Second, the medical severity of the claimant’s impairment is determined, and the severe impairment or combination of impairments also must meet a 12-month duration requirement. Id. §§ 404.1509, 404.1520(a)(4)(ii). However, if the claimant has no impairment or combination of impairments that significantly limits his ability to do basic work activities, he is not disabled. Id. § 404.1522(a). ... As the record shows, substantial evidence in the record supported the ALJ’s determination that Palmer did not have a severe impairment during the relevant period and was not disabled.

Section 404.1520(c) requires an ALJ to determine at step two whether an impairment significantly limits the claimant’s physical or mental ability to perform basic work activities.

Almadi · filed 2026-02-06(c)

The second step is whether the applicant has a severe impairment which significantly limits the physical or mental ability to do basic work activities, as defined in the relevant regulations. 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1520(c) and 416.920(c). ... Accordingly, the ALJ’s determination that Plaintiff’s OSA, accompanied by chronic headaches and complaints of memory loss, were not sufficiently severe to interfere with Plaintiff’s ability to perform work related activities is supported by other evidence in the record.

Section 404.1520(a)(4)(ii) requires the Commissioner to determine at step two whether a claimant has a medically severe impairment or combination of impairments.

Pickens · filed 2026-02-10(a)(4)(ii)

At step two of the sequential evaluation, the ALJ must determine if the claimant has a medically severe impairment or a combination of impairments. ... 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1520(a)(4)(ii), 404.1521. “Step two is merely a threshold determination meant to screen out weak claims.”

Section 404.1520(a)(4)(ii) requires an ALJ to determine at step two whether a claimant has a medically severe impairment; without one, the claimant is not disabled.

McGlothin · filed 2026-02-17(a)(4)(ii)

At step two, the ALJ determines the medical severity of a physical or mental impairment, and if the claimant does not have any medically severe impairments, he or she is not disabled. Stout v. Comm’r, Soc. Sec. Admin., 454 F.3d 1050, 1052 (9th Cir. 2006); 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520(a)(4)(ii); Tackett v. Apfel, 180 F.3d 1094, 1098 (9th Cir. 1999). ... Plaintiff argues that the ALJ committed reversible legal error by concluding that their fibromyalgia was not medically determinable at step two. ... Unlike Swales, plaintiff has not identified a diagnosis of fibromyalgia by a physician under the diagnostic criteria here. Consequently, the ALJ’s finding that plaintiff’s fibromyalgia was not medically determinable is supported by substantial evidence.

Section 404.1520's sequential evaluation does not require reversal for a step-two severity error when the ALJ finds another severe impairment and proceeds through the remaining steps.

Jefferson · filed 2026-02-17

However, even if there was an error, the ALJ's failure to consider the impairment as “severe” at Step 2 of the sequential analysis, will not necessarily require reversal or remand. Namely, errors at step two of the sequential analysis will not necessarily require reversal, if—as here—the ALJ finds at least one “severe” impairment and continues with the remaining steps in the sequential process. That is because in determining a plaintiff's residual functional capacity and ability to work later in the sequential process, the ALJ must consider even the impairments found not to be “severe” at step two. See Maziarz v. Secretary of Health and Human Servs., 837 F.2d 240, 244 (6th Cir. 1987); 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520.

At Step Two, an impairment is severe when it significantly limits a claimant’s physical or mental ability to do basic work activities.

Shoemaker · filed 2026-02-18(c)

An impairment is severe if it “significantly limits [an individual’s] physical or mental ability to do basic work activities.” 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520(c). ... Here, the ALJ’s failure to acknowledge significant evidence that supports the claimed severity and frequency of Plaintiff’s migraines leads the undersigned to conclude that the ALJ did not resolve conflicts in the evidence, especially when considering the de minimis standard that applies at Step Two. Higgs, 880 F.2d at 862. ... Thus, the ALJ’s conclusion that Plaintiff’s migraines are nonsevere is unsupported by substantial evidence.

Section 404.1520(a)(4)(ii) requires the ALJ to determine at step two whether the claimant has a severe impairment, but an error in finding an impairment non-severe is harmless when the ALJ proceeds and considers it in the residual functional capacity assessment.

Stearnes · filed 2026-02-20(a)(4)(ii)

At step two of the sequential evaluation, the ALJ determines whether a claimant has a “severe” impairment. See 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1520(a)(4)(ii), 416.920(a)(4)(ii). ... When an ALJ finds severe and non-severe impairments at step two and continues with the subsequent steps in the sequential evaluation process, any error at step two is harmless. ... Moreover, even if the ALJ did err when finding that Sternes’s diabetes and resultant frequent urination were non-severe, which Sternes has not shown, the ALJ considered these impairments when she assessed the RFC. Tr. 27, 30–32. So any error would be harmless. See Maziarz, 837 F.2d at 244.

Section 404.1520(a)(4)(ii) requires the ALJ at step two to determine whether a claimant has a severe impairment, while limitations from a non-severe impairment must still be considered at the later steps of the sequential evaluation.

Crawford · filed 2026-02-24(a)(4)(ii)

At step two, a claimant must establish that she has severe impairments “during the period for which [she] seeks disability benefits.” Glanden v. Kijakazi, 86 F.4th 838, 843 (9th Cir. 2023) (citing 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520(a)(4)(ii)). An impairment or combination of impairments is severe if it “significantly limits” a claimant’s “ability to do basic work activities.” Id. (quoting 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520(c)); Smolen v. Chater, 80 F.3d 1273, 1290 (9th Cir. 1996). ... Because the ALJ determined that plaintiff’s cirrhosis was non-severe, he was required to consider the “limitations and restrictions” imposed by that impairment at all remaining steps. Buck, 869 F.3d at 1049. ... The ALJ therefore erred by failing to consider the limitations and restrictions potentially caused plaintiff’s cirrhosis beyond step two as required. Buck, 869 F.3d at 1049 (“In assessing RFC, the adjudicator must consider limitations and restrictions imposed by all of an individual’s impairments, even those that are not severe.”) (citation modified).

At step two, § 404.1520(a)(4)(ii) requires determining whether a claimant has a severe medically determinable impairment that meets the Act's 12-month durational requirement.

Prichard · filed 2026-03-26(a)(4)(ii)

In short, these medical records appear to demonstrate the Plaintiff’s neurogenic bladder was a medically determinable impairment that met the twelve month durational threshold, and was “severe” to the point that it impacted her physical work abilities, including “walking” under Sections 404.1509, 404.1520(a)(4)(ii) and 404.1522(b)(1).

At step two, an impairment need not appear in the listings to qualify as severe and medically determinable.

Lint v. O'Malley · filed 2021-12-06(c)

There is no requirement that an impairment be described in a listing in step three in order for it to be considered a severe medically determinable impairment at step two.

At step two, an impairment is severe if it significantly limits the claimant’s ability to do basic work activities.

Valladares v. Commissioner of Social Security Administration · filed 2024-10-25(a)(4)(ii), (c)

At step two in the five-step process for evaluating disability claims, the ALJ evaluates whether the claimant has a medically severe impairment or combination of impairments which “significantly limits [the claimant’s] physical or mental ability to do basic work activities.” 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520(a)(4)(ii), § 404.1520(c). ... Here, the ALJ relied on “substantial evidence” in determining that Plaintiff’s depressive disorder was non-severe.

At step two, the claimant must show a severe impairment or combination of impairments; the agency may deny the claim when the medical evidence clearly establishes none.

Rabache v. Social Security Administration · filed 2019-12-30(a)(4)(ii), (c)

At step two, the agency determines whether the claimant’s alleged impairment or combination of impairments is “severe.” 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1520(a)(4)(ii), (c). ... Ms. Rabache failed to meet her de minimis burden that she had a severe impairment during the relevant time period.

The Step Two severity determination remains valid when a claimant has not shown inability to return to former work.

Martin v. Bowen · filed 1987-01-27(c)

In our own circuit, under Johnson, as later limited in Bunch, a two-step determination remains valid where the plaintiff has failed to show an inability to return to former work. ... The Magistrate in this case properly determined that this record as it stands does not support Bunch as controlling.

At step two, a medically supported impairment that exceeds the minimal severity threshold requires the ALJ to continue the sequential evaluation.

Orellana v. Astrue · filed 2008-02-06(c)

The ALJ erred in finding no severe mental impairment and ending the sequential evaluation at step two.

At step two, the ALJ must determine whether the claimant has a severe impairment or combination of impairments.

Castile v. Astrue · filed 2010-08-13(a)(4)(ii)

Procedurally, the ALJ is required to determine at step two of the sequential analysis whether the claimant in ... fact has an impairment or combination of impairments that is “severe.” 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520(a)(4)(ii).

At step two, an error in failing to classify an impairment as severe is harmless when the adjudicator considers its symptoms in later steps.

Freeman v. Commissioner, Social Security Administration · filed 2014-11-25(a)(4)(ii)

Accordingly, any error in failing to find that Mr. Freeman’s lower back pain was severe was harmless because the symptoms were nonetheless considered in the subsequent steps of the ALJ’s analysis.

At step two, the ALJ needs medical evidence of a severe medically determinable impairment to evaluate a claimed condition.

Cookson v. Colvin · filed 2015-07-01(c)

Because Ms. Cookson’s record does not contain any confirmed diagnosis of somatoform or any other severe medically determinable mental impairment from either a treating, consulting or examining physician, the ALJ had no evidentiary basis upon which to evaluate somatoform at Step 2.

At step two, an impairment is severe if it significantly limits the claimant’s ability to do basic work activities.

Shaner v. Commissioner Social Security Administration · filed 2019-10-15(c)

The ALJ acknowledged Plaintiff’s knee pain and loss of balance but reasonably concluded, based on the substantial evidence cited above, that Plaintiff’s knee disorder was non-severe.

Section 404.1520(c) requires the ALJ at step two to determine whether the claimant has a severe medically determinable impairment or combination of impairments.

Compton v. Commissioner · filed 2020-06-01(c)

In addition, objective medical evidence in the record on which the ALJ based his decision further established that Plaintiff's diabetes was not a severe impairment within the context of 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520(c).

An error in the Step Two severity determination is harmless when the ALJ considers the impairment in assessing residual functional capacity and substantial evidence supports that assessment.

Morrow v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2020-07-27(c)

As “the written determination contains a thorough and lengthy discussion” of Plaintiff's back pain and the RFC includes a limitation to accommodate that condition, any error in the ALJ’s Step Two determination was harmless because his RFC finding is supported by substantial evidence and properly concludes that Plaintiff's past relevant work does not exceed her exertional limits.

At step two, an ALJ who finds at least one severe impairment may proceed without identifying every severe impairment.

Ealy v. Kijakazi (CONSENT) · filed 2021-09-28(c)

Because the ALJ found that Plaintiff has at least one severe impairment, the ALJ was not required to identify all of Plaintiff’s severe impairments before moving to step three of the sequential evaluation process.

An erroneous step-two severity finding is harmless when the ALJ considers the impairment at later steps, includes relevant limitations in the residual functional capacity, and supports those limitations with substantial evidence.

Liddle v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2022-08-25(a)(4)(ii)

Therefore, even assuming – without finding – that the ALJ erred by finding at Step Two that Plaintiff’s migraine and psychological impairments were non-severe, the error would be harmless because the ALJ expressly considered the impairments in subsequent steps of his evaluation, included relevant limitations in his RFC findings, and supported those limitations with substantial evidence.

At step two, an ALJ who finds impairments nonsevere must explain how that finding accounts for a prior decision finding the same impairments severe immediately before the period under review.

Mari v. Saul · filed 2022-09-27(a)(4)(ii)

The court agrees with the ALJ that benefit eligibility is limited to that eight-month period, but finds it was error to not explain how he reconciled the 2020 step two denial with the prior ALJ decision that the same impairments were severe only one day earlier. The ALJ should have, but did not consider the prior ALJ finding and explain his consideration of that finding.

At step two, § 404.1520(c) requires the ALJ to determine whether the claimant has an impairment that significantly limits the ability to do basic work activities.

Barrett v. Kijakazi · filed 2023-03-06(c)

At step two of the sequential process, the ALJ must determine whether the claimant suffers from a “severe” impairment, i.e., one that significantly limits her physical or mental ability to do basic work activities.

At step two, an ALJ who finds any severe impairment need not identify every severe impairment before continuing the evaluation.

Anguiano v. Social Security Administration, Commissioner · filed 2023-03-21(a)(4)(ii)

Ifthe ALJ finds any severe impairment, she need not list every severe impairment.

At step two, identifying at least one severe impairment satisfies the severity requirement.

Bullock v. Social Security Administration · filed 2023-09-21(a)(4)(ii)

As an initial matter, the ALJ identified Mr. Bullock’s reconstructive surgery of weight bearing joint; degenerative disc disease; and disorders of muscle, ligament, and fascia as severe impairments. R. 17. Therefore, the ALJ satisfied step two of the sequential disability analysis.

At step two, an ALJ may end the disability inquiry for lack of a severe impairment only when the medical evidence clearly establishes no more than a minimal effect on the claimant’s ability to work.

Martinez v. Commissioner of Social Security Administration · filed 2024-03-14(c)

An impairment is not severe if it does not significantly limit the claimant’s ability to do basic work activities. 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520(c). ... The ALJ should have continued the sequential analysis beyond step two because the medical evidence does not clearly establish that Plaintiff’s claim was “groundless.”

At step two, an ALJ determines whether a claimant has a severe impairment or combination of impairments and need not mention every piece of evidence in doing so.

Blacker v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2024-03-14(a)(4)(ii)

Additionally, the ALJ here mentioned evidence that both supported and undermined his conclusion. Because he was not required to mention each piece of evidence, the Court finds that this step-two analysis was not in error.

At step two, an impairment that meets the de minimis severity threshold must be classified as severe.

(SS) Landis v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2024-03-15(c)

Such evidence is enough to meet the de minimis standard posed at step two and classify Plaintiff’s mental impairments as severe.

At step two, failure to consider a particular impairment is harmless if the ALJ finds another severe impairment and proceeds to step three.

Lanford v. Commissioner, Social Security Administration · filed 2024-03-18(a)(4)(ii)

Thus, the failure to consider a particular impairment at step two is also harmless if the ALJ finds at least one impairment to be severe and proceeds to step three.

At step two, an ALJ must assess the severity of a claimant’s impairment; failing to analyze it and its effects at later steps warrants remand.

Hicks v. Kijakazi · filed 2024-03-19(a)(4)(ii)

In any event, the ALJ’s lack of analysis of Ms. Hicks’ lumbar disc disease, both at the severity step and in considering its effects on the other steps, warrants a remand.

At step two, an ALJ’s failure to identify the severity of one impairment is harmless when the ALJ identifies other severe impairments and proceeds to step three.

Schofield v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2024-03-26(a)(4)(ii)

Second, the Court agrees with the Magistrate Judge’s finding that even if the ALJ failed to articulate the severity of Plaintiff’s cervical DDD at step two—which he did not—the error would be harmless because the ALJ identified other severe impairments and proceeded to step three.

At step two, the ALJ determines whether an alleged impairment is sufficiently severe to limit the claimant’s ability to work.

Bossart v. Kijakazi · filed 2024-03-27(a)(4)(ii)

Second, the ALJ must then determine if the claimant’s alleged impairment is sufficiently severe to limit his ability to work. 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520(a)(4)(ii).

At step two, an ALJ must consider significant medical evidence before finding an impairment nonsevere and ending the disability inquiry.

Miller v. Kijakazi · filed 2024-04-22(c)

In concluding that Plaintiff’s visual limitations were not severe at step two, the ALJ erred by: (1) ignoring an emergency room report from the Rhode Island Hospital during the relevant period; and (2) ignoring Plaintiff’s testimony regarding his central visual acuity.

At step two, an error in classifying an impairment as non-severe may be harmless if the ALJ finds another severe impairment and proceeds through the remaining steps.

Howard v. Commissioner, Social Security Administration · filed 2024-10-03(a)(4)(ii)

As a result, even if some of Howard’s other conditions should have been categorized as severe impairments, any error was harmless because the ALJ proceeded to the remaining steps of the five-step analysis.

Section 404.1520 requires an ALJ to determine whether an impairment is severe at step two and treats an impairment as not severe only when it does not significantly limit basic work abilities.

Holzberg v. Astrue · filed 2010-01-11(a)(4)(iii), (c)

At step two of the sequential disability evaluation process, the ALJ must determine if an impairment is “severe.” 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520, § 416.920. ... An impairment is “not severe” if it does not “significantly limit” a claimant’s mental or physical abilities to do basic work activities. 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520(a)(4)(iii), (c), § 416.920(a)(4)(iii), (c); SSR 96-3p, 1996 WL 374181 *1. ... The step two inquiry described above, however, is a de minimis screening device used to dispose of groundless claims. ... The ALJ thus erred in failing to conclude that plaintiffs depression was severe.

At step two, identifying one severe impairment permits the ALJ to proceed; failing to identify another as severe is harmless if the ALJ considers it in later steps.

WILLIAMS v. SAUL · filed 2019-09-09(c)

Furthermore, assuming for the sake of the argument that the ALJ erred, this error would have been harmless because the ALJ proceeded to the next sequential levels and took into account all of Plaintiff’s physical impairments in assessing Plaintiff’s RFC.

Section 404.1520(c) requires the ALJ to assess the severity of an alleged impairment at step two; omitting that assessment requires remand when the later analysis does not adequately address the impairment.

Morshed v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2020-09-30(c)

At step two of the evaluation, the Commissioner must “consider[s] the medical severity of [the claimant’s] impairment(s).” 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1520(a)(4)(ii), (c); 416.920(a)(4) (i), (c). While the ALJ did find Morshed’s depression and anxiety to be severe impairments, the ALJ failed to evaluate any evidence of Morshed’s migraines and headaches in the record, and did not make any severity determination with respect to Morshed’s headaches and migraines. ... The Court concludes that this was legal error.

At step two, the ALJ must assess whether a medically determinable impairment significantly limits the claimant’s ability to do basic work activities.

Panna v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2021-02-22(c)

At step two of the analysis, the ALU must determine whether the claimant has a medically determinable impairment, or a combination of impairments, that is severe, meaning that it limits his or her ability to do basic work activities, and meets the duration requirement. 20 C.F.R. §404.1520(a)(4)(ii) and (c); 416.920(a)(4)(ii) and (c). ... On remand, the ALJ must examine whether plaintiffs urinary urgency and frequency, or any related urologic diagnosis, is a medically determinable impairment, whether it is severe or non-severe in nature, and the limiting effects it may have on her RFC assessment.

At step two, finding one severe impairment permits the ALJ to continue the evaluation; omitting another impairment is harmless if the ALJ considers its effects later.

Vasquez v. Saul · filed 2021-03-24(a)(4)(ii)

So, even if the ALJ’s failure to classify Plaintiff’s panic disorder and agoraphobia as severe was error (the Court does not hold it is, and Plaintiff actually agrees [dkt. 22, fn. 1]), any error is harmless, as the ALJ has acknowledged these diagnoses exist and goes on to analyze the impact of these impairments on Plaintiff’s functioning.

At step two, an ALJ must assess whether the claimant has a severe impairment or combination of impairments; failure to address relevant medical findings requires remand when the error is not cured at a later step.

Kosich v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2022-11-28(a)(4)(ii)

As noted above, the ALJ’s task at step two is to gauge whether a claimant has a medically determinable impairment or combination of impairments that is severe. ... The Court is therefore unable to engage in a meaningful review of the ALJ’s step two finding that the Plaintiff’s psychological problems did not have anything more than a de minimis impact on her ability to work. ... Thus, the ALJ’s failure at step two to address the findings of Drs. Gearhardstein and Gliko regarding the Plaintiff’s mental health issues was not harmless.

At step two, finding at least one severe impairment permits the disability evaluation to continue, making an error in classifying another impairment harmless.

McKenzie v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2023-10-02(a)(4)(ii)

In other words, so long as the ALJ identifies any severe impairment at step two, there is no reversible error because that is enough for the claimant “to continue on to the later steps.”

At step two, failing to classify an additional impairment as severe is harmless when the ALJ identifies other severe impairments and proceeds to step three.

Slackta v. Commissioner Social Security · filed 2025-06-25(a)(4)(ii)

With this standard in mind, even if the ALJ should have characterized Plaintiff’s agoraphobia as a severe impairment, any error is harmless because the ALJ characterized other impairments – spinal impairment; residual limitations due to a history of upper left compartment syndrome, status post multiple fasciotomies; obesity; substance abuse; PTSD/anxiety and bipolar disorder – as severe.

Section 404.1520(c) requires the ALJ to assess whether an impairment significantly limits a claimant’s ability to perform basic work activities; an erroneous step-two finding can require remand when the impairment is omitted from later steps.

SIPIONE v. COMMISSIONER OF SOCIAL SECURITY · filed 2025-07-10(c)

As previously noted, at step two of the sequential evaluation, an ALJ must determine whether the claimant has a “severe impairment” or combination of impairments that “significantly limits [the plaintiff’s] physical or mental ability to do basic work activities[.]” 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1520(c), 416.920(c). ... In this case, the Court cannot conclude that the ALJ’s error at step two regarding Plaintiff’s mental impairments was harmless. The ALJ never again mentioned Plaintiff’s mental impairments after step two.

At step five, the Commissioner must prove that, based on the claimant’s residual functional capacity, age, education, and past work experience, the claimant can do other work.

Cuevas v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2020-03-31(g)

At step five of the sequential evaluation analysis, the burden shifts to the Commissioner to prove that, based on the claimant’s residual functional capacity, age, education, and past work experience, he can do other work. Bowen v. Yuckert, 482 U.S. 137, 142 (1987); 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1520(g), 404.1560(c), 416.920(g), 960(c). ... Based on the foregoing, the ALJ’s reliance on the testimony was appropriate and the step five finding was supported by substantial evidence.

Section 404.1520(a)(4) requires disability claims to be evaluated through a five-step sequential process, and the ALJ stops at a step when the claimant is found not disabled.

Fadeley v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2020-03-31(a)(4)

To determine whether a claimant is disabled, the ALJ conducts a five-step evaluation process. 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520(a)(4). If the ALJ finds the claimant is not disabled at a certain step, the ALJ does not proceed to the next step. Id.

Section 404.1520(c) treats an impairment as severe when it significantly limits an individual's physical or mental ability to perform basic work activities.

Bryant v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2020-05-18(c)

By definition, an impairment is “severe” if it “significantly limits” an individual’s “physical or mental ability to do basic work activities[.]” 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520(c). Given this definition, if the ALJ meant to find no limitations related to Plaintiff’s IBS were required, he should have explained why.

An impairment is severe when it significantly limits an individual's ability to perform basic work activities.

Patel v. Saul · filed 2020-11-18(c)

Backing up a bit, it is important to understand that “[a] severe impairment is one that significantly limits an individual’s ability to perform basic work activities.” Million v. Astrue, 260 F. App’x 918, 922 (7th Cir. 2008); see also, 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520(c); SSR 16-3P.

At step two, an impairment is severe when it significantly limits basic work activities; the inquiry is only a threshold, and an impairment is non-severe only when its effect is so minimal that it clearly would not interfere with work.

Fair v. Saul · filed 2022-01-25(c)

A severe impairment is an impairment or combination of impairments that significantly limits the claimant’s physical or mental ability to do basic work activities. 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520(c). ... “Step two is a threshold inquiry.” McDaniel v. Bowen, 800 F.2d 1026, 1031 (11th Cir. 1986). Only claims based on the most trivial impairments may be rejected, and an impairment is not severe only if the abnormality is so slight and its effect so minimal that it would clearly not be expected to interfere with the individual’s ability to work. Id.

At step two, an impairment is severe when it significantly limits a claimant’s physical or mental ability to do basic work activities; a severe impairment must be reflected by limitations in the RFC.

Ward v. Saul · filed 2022-07-27(c)

The ALJ found that plaintiff’s migraines are a severe impairment (R. 18), i.e., they “significantly limit[] [plaintiff’s] physical or mental ability to do basic work activities.” 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520(c). However, the ALJ did not include any limitations in the RFC to address plaintiff’s migraines. ... Having characterized plaintiffs migraines as a severe impairment, the ALJ was required to include limitations for them in the RFC. Because she failed to do so, the case must be remanded.

Section 404.1520(c) treats an impairment as severe when it significantly limits a claimant’s physical or mental ability to perform basic work activities.

Preston v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2022-10-12(c)

A “severe impairment” is defined as “any impairment or combination of impairments which significantly limits [a claimant’s] physical or mental ability to do basic work activities.” 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520(c). ... The Court finds that the record substantially supports ALJ Wells’ determination that Plaintiff’s urinary issues were not severe.

At step two, § 404.1520(c) requires an impairment to significantly limit a claimant’s ability to perform basic work activities to be considered severe.

De Cordova v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2023-09-07(c)

In the second step of the five-step analysis, the ALJ must determine whether a claimant has a severe impairment or a combination of impairments. An impairment is considered “severe” if it significantly limits an individual’s physical or mental abilities to do basic work activities and persists for at least twelve months. SSR 96-3p, 1996 WL 374181, at *1 (S.S.A. July 2, 1996); 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520(c); see also Cardoza v. Comm’r of Soc. Sec., 353 F. Supp. 3d 267, 279–80 (S.D.N.Y. 2019).

Section 404.1520(c) treats an impairment as severe when it significantly limits a claimant’s ability to work.

Gajos v. Social Security · filed 2023-10-10(c)

Under 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520(c), “severe” means a significant limitation that interferes with a claimant’s ability to work.

Section 404.1520 requires a step-two determination of whether a claimant has a severe impairment or combination of impairments, and defines a severe impairment as one that significantly limits the ability to do basic work activities.

Herrera · filed 2025-12-17(a)(4)(ii), (c)

At step two of the five-step sequential inquiry, the Commissioner determines whether the claimant has a severe impairment or combination of impairments. 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520(a)(4)(ii). An impairment is severe if it “significantly limits” an individual’s “ability to do basic work activities.” 20 C.F.R. §404.1520(c).

At step two, an impairment is severe only if it significantly limits the claimant's physical or mental ability to perform basic work activities.

Pierson · filed 2026-02-25(a)(4)(ii), (c)

“A ‘severe impairment’ is defined as any impairment or combination of impairments which significantly limits [the claimant’s] physical or mental ability to do basic work activities.” ... Other than his subjective complaints and self-reports, plaintiff has proffered no evidence that he suffers from any additional severe impairment. ... The undersigned is sympathetic to plaintiff's various conditions and pain; however, plaintiff has failed to meet his burden that he suffers from a severe impairment other than those listed by the ALJ.

Section 404.1520(c) treats an impairment as severe when it significantly limits a claimant’s physical or mental ability to perform basic work activities.

Addams · filed 2026-03-03(c)

“A ‘severe impairment’ is defined as any impairment or combination of impairments which significantly limits [the claimant’s] physical or mental ability to do basic work activities.” ... Therefore, as the ALJ did not determine whether this condition constitutes a severe impairment, judicial review is frustrated, and remand is necessary for the ALJ to render a determination in the first instance.