20 C.F.R. § 404.1520

Section 404.1520 requires disability claims to be evaluated through five sequential steps, with the inquiry ending when the claimant is found disabled or not disabled at a step.

Lopez v. O'Malley, Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2022-03-21(a)(4)

The Social Security Administration (“SSA”) regulations mandate a five-step inquiry to determine whether a claimant is disabled under 42 U.S.C. § 423. See 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520(a)(4); Dixon v. Shalala, 54 F.3d 1019, 1022 (2d Cir. 1995). Each step is addressed in sequential order. See 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520(a)(4). “If [the SSA] can find that [a claimant] [is] disabled or not disabled at a step,” the inquiry is concluded at that step, and subsequent steps are not considered. Id. At the first step, the Commissioner must determine whether the individual is currently engaged in any substantial gainful activity. 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520(a)(4)(i). At the second step, the Commissioner determines whether the claimant has a “severe medically determinable physical or mental impairment” and, if so, whether the impairment meets the duration requirement of Section 404.1509. 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520(a)(4)(ii). At the third step, the Commissioner determines whether the impairment meets or equals a listing in Appendix 1 of 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520(a)(4)(iii). If the claimant proves that he or she has an impairment that meets a listing in Appendix 1, the Commissioner may find the claimant disabled at the third step. Id. Otherwise, the Commissioner will proceed to consider the remaining two steps. See 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520(d).

Section 404.1520(a)(4) requires applying the five-step sequential evaluation process to determine whether a claimant is disabled, including when the claimant has fibromyalgia.

Smith v. Social Security Administration, Commissioner · filed 2022-03-22(a)(4)

But, consistent with SSR 12-2p (and as explained above), the ALJ here applied the sequential five-step test for disability in light of Smith’s fibromyalgia. See 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520(a)(4); Winschel, 631 F.3d at 1178; Background B.3 supra. Among other things, the ALJ found that Smith’s fibromyalgia qualified as a severe impairment. Doc. 12-3 at 30. And, in assessing Smith’s residual functional capacity (RFC), the ALJ not only accounted for Smith’s fibromyalgia symptoms, but also included accommodations for her fibromyalgia. See Doc. 12-3 at 35.

Section 404.1520 requires the Commissioner to evaluate disability claims through a five-step sequential process, including whether the claimant can perform past work or other work.

Daugherty v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2022-03-28

The Commissioner has established a five-step sequential evaluation process to determine whether an individual is disabled under the Act. See 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1520, 416.920.

Section 404.1520 establishes a five-step sequential process for deciding disability claims, ending with an assessment of whether the claimant can adjust to other work.

Lloyd v. Social Security Administration · filed 2022-04-04(a)(4)

By regulation, the Administration follows a five-step process to determine whether a claimant is disabled. ... At the third step the claimant must show that his impairment “meets or equals the severity of an impairment listed” in 20 C.F.R., Part 404, Subpart B, Appendix 1. ... If a claimant makes such a showing, the inquiry is at an end and the claimant is entitled to benefits. ... If the claimant fails to make such a showing, the analysis proceeds to step four, in which the claimant must show his impairment prevents him from doing his past work. ... If the claimant is unable to perform his past work, the analysis proceeds to the fifth and final step. ... If at any step the claimant is determined to be disabled or not disabled, the inquiry ends.

Section 404.1520 requires a step-by-step evaluation of a disability claimant's work activity, impairments, residual functional capacity, and vocational factors to determine entitlement to benefits.

Hubbard v. Kijakazi · filed 2022-05-19(a)(4)

The Social Security Administration has promulgated a sequential process to determine whether a claimant qualifies for disability benefits. See 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520(a)(4). The determination involves a step-by-step analysis of the claimant’s current work activity, the severity of the claimant’s impairments, the claimant’s residual functional capacity and his or her age, education and work experience. Id. At Step one, the claimant has the burden to establish that he or she has not engaged in substantial gainful activity since his or her alleged disability onset date. ... At Step three, if the claimant shows that his or her impairment meets or equals a presumptively disabling impairment listed in the regulations, he or she is automatically found disabled and is entitled to benefits. Id. ... At Step four, the claimant has the burden to prove he or she lacks the RFC to perform his or her past relevant work. Cuthrell, 702 F.3d at 1116. If the claimant can still do his or her past relevant work, he or she will be found not disabled; otherwise, at Step five, the burden shifts to the Commissioner to prove, considering the claimant’s RFC, age, education, and work experience, that there are other jobs in the national economy the claimant can perform. Id.; see Jones v. Astrue, 619 F.3d 963, 971 (8th Cir. 2010).

Section 404.1520(a)(4) establishes a five-step sequential disability evaluation, under which a claimant can qualify by satisfying Steps One through Three or Steps One, Two, Four, and Five.

Anderson v. Commissioner Social Security · filed 2022-05-24(a)(4)

Regulations promulgated by SSA set forth five steps for assessing disability. Under that process, a person may qualify as disabled through two partially overlapping paths: by prevailing at Steps One, Two, and Three, or alternatively by succeeding at Steps One, Two, Four, and Five. See 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520(a)(4) (2011).

Section 404.1520(a)(4) requires the Commissioner to evaluate disability through five steps: substantial gainful activity, severe impairment, listed impairment, past relevant work, and other work in the national economy.

FATUR v. KIJAZI · filed 2022-07-11(a)(4)

Pursuant to the five-steps: The Commissioner must determine: (1) whether the claimant is currently engaged in substantial gainful activity; (2) if not, whether the claimant has a severe impairment or a combination of impairments that is severe; (3) whether the medical evidence of the claimant’s impairment or combination of impairments meets or equals the criteria listed in 20 C.F.R. Pt. 404, Subpt. P, App’x. 1; (4) whether the claimant’s impairments prevent [him or] her from performing past relevant work; and (5) if the claimant is incapable of performing [his or] her past relevant work, whether [he or] she can perform any other work which exists in the national economy. Biller, 962 F. Supp. 2d at 776 (citing 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520(a)(4)).

Section 404.1520 requires the Commissioner to determine disability through a five-step sequential analysis covering substantial gainful activity, severity, listed impairments, past relevant work, and other work in the national economy.

FRIZZIE v. COMMISSIONER OF SOCIAL SECURITY · filed 2022-07-12(b)-(f)

The Commissioner has promulgated regulations for determining disability that require application of a five-step sequential analysis. See 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520. This five-step process is summarized as follows: 1. If the claimant currently is engaged in substantial gainful employment, she will be found “not disabled.” 2. If the claimant does not suffer from a “severe impairment,” she will be found “not disabled.” 3. If the severe impairment meets or equals a listed impairment in 20 C.F.R. Part 404, Subpart P, Appendix 1 and has lasted or is expected to last for a continuous period of at least twelve months, the claimant will be found “disabled.” 4. If the claimant can still perform work she has done in the past (“past relevant work”) despite the severe impairment, she will be found “not disabled.” 5. Finally, the Commissioner will consider the claimant’s ability to perform work (“residual functional capacity”), age, education, and past work experience to determine whether or not she is capable of performing other work which exists in the national economy. If she is incapable, she will be found “disabled.” If she is capable, she will be found “not disabled.” 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520(b)-(f).

Section 404.1520 requires disability claims to be evaluated through a five-step sequential process, proceeding step by step until the claimant is found disabled or not disabled.

Parrott v. Social Security Administration, Commissioner · filed 2022-08-08

The Social Security Administration has established a five-step sequential evaluation process for determining whether an individual is disabled and thus eligible for DIB. ... The evaluator will follow the steps in order until making a finding of either disabled or not disabled; if no finding is made, the analysis will proceed to the next step.

Section 404.1520(a) requires the ALJ to evaluate disability through five sequential steps, including substantial gainful activity, severity, listed impairments, past relevant work, and other work in the national economy.

Hughes v. Commissioner of Social Security Administration · filed 2022-08-16(a)(4)

To determine whether a claimant is disabled, the ALJ follows a five-step process. 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520(a). ... At the first step, the ALJ determines whether the claimant is presently engaging in substantial gainful activity. 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520(a)(4)(i). If so, the claimant is not disabled, and the inquiry ends. ... At step two, the ALJ determines whether the claimant has a “severe” medically determinable physical or mental impairment. Id. § 404.1520(a)(4)(ii). If not, the claimant is not disabled, and the inquiry ends. ... If not, the ALJ proceeds to step four, where she assesses the claimant’s RFC and determines whether the claimant is still capable of performing past relevant work. Id. § 404.1520(a)(4)(iv). If so, the claimant is not disabled, and the inquiry ends. ... the ALJ proceeds to the fifth and final step. There, she determines whether the claimant can perform any other work in the national economy based on the claimant’s RFC, age, education, and work experience. Id. § 404.1520(a)(4)(v). If the claimant can perform such work, she is not disabled. Id. If she cannot, she is disabled. Id.

Section 404.1520(a) requires the Commissioner to evaluate disability claims through a five-step sequence covering substantial gainful activity, severity, listed impairments, past work, and other available work.

Cartagena v. Kijakazi · filed 2022-08-29(a)

In evaluating whether a claimant is disabled as defined in the Social Security Act, the Commissioner follows a five-step sequential evaluation process. 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1520(a), 416.920(a). Under this process, the Commissioner must determine, in sequence: (1) whether the claimant is engaged in substantial gainful activity; (2) whether the claimant has a severe impairment; (3) whether the claimant's impairment meets or equals a listed impairment; (4) whether the claimant is able to do past relevant work, considering his or her residual functional capacity (RFC); and (5) whether the claimant is able to do any other work that exists in significant numbers in the national economy, considering his or her RFC, age, education, and work experience. 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1520(a), 416.920(a).

Section 404.1520 requires disability claims to be evaluated through a five-step sequence, including determining at step three whether the claimant's impairment meets or equals a listed impairment.

Scott M v. Kijakazi · filed 2022-09-15(a)(4)(iii)

The ALJ must follow five steps in evaluating a claim of disability. See 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1520, 416.920. First, if a claimant is working at a substantial gainful activity, she is not disabled. 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520(b). Second, if a claimant does not have any impairment or combination of impairments which significantly limit her physical or mental ability to do basic work activities, then she does not have a severe impairment and is not disabled. 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520(c). Third, if a claimant’s impairments meet or equal an impairment listed in 20 C.F.R. Part 404, Subpart P, Appendix 1, she is disabled. 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520(d). Fourth, if a claimant’s impairments do not prevent her from doing past relevant work, she is not disabled. 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520(e). Fifth, if a claimant’s impairments (considering her residual functional capacity, age, education, and past work) prevent her from doing other work that exists in the national economy, then she is disabled. 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520(f).

Section 404.1520 requires disability claims to be evaluated through a five-step sequential process addressing substantial gainful activity, impairment severity and duration, listed impairments, past relevant work and residual functional capacity, and other work in the national economy.

Webb v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2022-09-23

The factual determination is made by using a five-step test. See 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520; 20 C.F.R. § 416.920. In the following order, the ALJ must evaluate whether the claimant: ... 1) is performing substantial gainful activity; ... 2) suffers from an impairment that is severe and meets a durational requirement, or suffers from a combination of impairments that is severe and meets the durational requirement; ... 3) suffers from an impairment which meets or equals any impairment listed in the appendix and which meets the duration requirement; ... 4) is unable to perform her past relevant work which includes an assessment of the claimant’s residual functional capacity; and 5) is unable to perform any other work existing in significant numbers in the national economy.

Section 404.1520 requires an ALJ to use a five-step sequential process, including deciding at step two whether an impairment or combination of impairments is severe.

Angue v. Kijakazi · filed 2022-09-29(a)(4)(ii), (c)

At step two, the ALJ decides whether the claimant’s impairment or combination of impairments is “severe” (see 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520(a)(4)(ii)), “meaning that it significantly limits the claimant’s ‘physical or mental ability to do basic work activities.’” Ford, 950 F.3d at 1148 (quoting 20 C.F.R. § 404.1522(a)). If no severe impairment is found, the claimant will not be found to be disabled. 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520(c). ... As for the conditions that the ALJ did analyze but found to be non-severe (right knee pain) or not medically determined (fibromyalgia), the ALJ erred in those regards as well.

Section 404.1520 requires disability claims to proceed through a five-step evaluation, including determining whether the claimant has a severe impairment at step two and assessing residual functional capacity and past relevant work at step four.

FUNK v. COMMISSIONER OF SOCIAL SECURITY · filed 2022-09-30(a)(4)(ii), (a)(4)(iv)

The Commissioner has promulgated a five-step, sequential analysis for evaluating a claimant’s alleged disability status for purposes of social security benefits, as outlined in 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1520(a)(4)(i-v). ... 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). A “severe impairment” is one that “significantly limits [the claimant’s] physical or mental ability to do basic work activities[.]” Id. §§ 404.1520(c), 416.920(c). If the claimant lacks such an impairment, he is not disabled. Id. §§ 404.1520(a)(4)(ii), 416.920(a)(4)(ii). If he has such an impairment, the ALJ moves on to step three. ... At step four, the ALJ assesses the claimant’s “residual functional capacity” (“RFC”) and whether he can perform his “past relevant work.” Id. §§ 404.1520(a)(4)(iv), 416.920(a)(4)(iv). A claimant’s “[RFC] is the most [he] can still do despite [his] limitations.” Id. §§ 404.1545(a)(1), 416.945(a)(1). If the claimant can perform his past relevant work despite his limitations, he is not disabled. Id. §§ 404.1520(a)(4)(iv), 416.920(a)(4)(iv). If he cannot, the ALJ moves on to step five.

Section 404.1520 requires a five-step sequential evaluation of disability claims and ends further review when disability or nondisability is found at any step.

Neale v. Kijakazi · filed 2022-10-07(a)(4)

The Commissioner must perform a five-step analysis to determine whether a person is disabled. See 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520; Plummer v. Apfel, 186 F.3d 422, 427-28 (3d Cir. 1999). If the Commissioner makes a finding of disability or non-disability at any point in the sequential process, the Commissioner will not review the claim further. 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520(a)(4).

Section 404.1520 requires disability claims to be evaluated through a five-step sequence, with the claimant bearing the burden through step four and the Commissioner at step five.

Paula B. v. Kijakazi · filed 2022-10-31

The ALJ must follow five steps in evaluating a claim of disability. See 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1520, 416.920. First, if a claimant is working at a substantial gainful activity, she is not disabled. 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520(b). Second, if a claimant does not have any impairment or combination of impairments which significantly limit her physical or mental ability to do basic work activities, then she does not have a severe impairment and is not disabled. 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520(c). Third, if a claimant’s impairments meet or equal an impairment listed in 20 C.F.R. Part 404, Subpart P, Appendix 1, she is disabled. 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520(d). Fourth, if a claimant’s impairments do not prevent her from doing past relevant work, she is not disabled. 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520(e). Fifth, if a claimant’s impairments (considering her residual functional capacity, age, education, and past work) prevent her from doing other work that exists in the national economy, then she is disabled. 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520(f). Significantly, the claimant bears the burden of proof at steps one through four, but the Commissioner bears the burden at step five.

Section 404.1520 establishes a five-step sequential process for determining disability, with the claimant bearing the burden through the first four steps and the Commissioner bearing it at the fifth step.

FLANNIGAN v. COMMISSIONER OF SOCIAL SECURITY · filed 2022-11-22(a)(4)

The Commissioner employs a five-step sequential evaluation process for disability claims. See 20 § 404.1520(a)(4). The claimant bears the burden of proof for the first four steps of the analysis, and the burden shifts to the Commissioner for the fifth step. Poulos » Connn’r of Soc, Sec,, 474 F.3d 88, 91-92 Gd Cir. 2007); Jones v. Barnhart, 364 F.3d 501, 503 (3d Cir. 2004).

Section 404.1520 establishes a five-step sequential process for evaluating whether a claimant is disabled.

HESTER v. COMMISSIONER OF SOCIAL SECURITY · filed 2022-12-29(a)(4)(i–v)

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)(i–v).

Section 404.1520 establishes a five-step sequential evaluation for disability claims, assigning the claimant the burden at the first four steps and the Commissioner the burden at the fifth.

Smith v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2023-01-25

The applicable regulations set forth a five-step analysis the Commissioner must follow in determining eligibility for disability benefits. 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1520 and 416.920. ... The burden of proof is on the applicant for the first four steps, with the Commissioner bearing the burden of proof on the final step. 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1520(a)(4) and 416.920(a)(4); ... All five steps need not be addressed because if the claimant fails to meet the criteria at either of the first two steps, the inquiry ceases and the claimant is not eligible for disability benefits, but if the claimant meets the criteria for the third or fourth step, the inquiry ceases with the claimant eligible for disability benefits. 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1520 and 416.920.

Section 404.1520 requires a five-step sequential evaluation of disability claims, including determining at Step Three whether an impairment meets or medically equals a listed impairment.

Flory v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2022-09-29(a)(4)(iii)

A claimant will be found “disabled” at Step Three of the sequential evaluation if his impairment meets or equals one of the listings in the Listing of Impairments. 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520(a)(4)(iii); Turner v. Comm'r of Soc. Sec., 381 F. App'x 488, 491 (6th Cir. 2010). ... Plaintiff has the burden at Step 3 to show she has an impairment or combination of impairments that meets or medically equals the criteria of an impairment listed in 20 C.F.R. § 404, Subpart P, App. 1. Foster v. Halter, 279 F.3d 348, 354 (6th Cir. 2001); 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520(a)(4)(iii). ... In addition, the ALJ did not conduct the analysis required by the applicable legal framework. The Sixth Circuit has held that the ALJ must “actually evaluate the evidence, compare it to [the relevant listed impairment], and give an explained conclusion, in order to facilitate meaningful judicial review.” Reynolds, 424 F. App’x at 416 (emphasis added). The ALJ did not do so. Therefore, his finding is not supported by substantial evidence and reversal is required. Id.

Section 404.1520 requires the SSA to evaluate disability claims through five sequential steps, including a listings determination and a residual-functional-capacity assessment.

Jones v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2023-03-23

The Second ALJ’s decision describes the five-step sequential evaluation process the SSA must use in considering disability applications. Tr. at 1163–651; 20 C.F.R § 404.1520. As described by the Fifth Circuit that process works as follows: ... First, a claimant must not be presently working. Second, a claimant must establish that he has an impairment or combination of impairments which significantly limits his physical or mental ability to do basic work activities. Third, to secure a finding of disability without consideration of age, education, and work experience, a claimant must establish that his impairment meets or equals an impairment enumerated in the listing of impairments in the appendix to the regulations. Fourth, a claimant must establish that his impairment prevents him from doing past relevant work. Finally, the burden shifts to the Secretary to establish that the claimant can perform relevant work. If the Secretary meets this burden, the claimant must then prove that he cannot in fact perform the work suggested. ... Under step three, if the ALJ determines that a claimant’s impairment corresponds to a listed impairment in 20 C.F.R. Part 404, Subpart P, Appendix 1 (“listing”) , the ALJ then determines the claimant’s residual functioning capacity (“RFC”) to be used in assessing the type of work a claimant can do. 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520. The claimant must satisfy each of the five-steps to qualify for disability insurance benefits. See id.

Section 404.1520 requires disability claims to be evaluated through a five-step sequence, with the Commissioner bearing the burden at step five to show that suitable work exists in significant numbers in the national economy.

McCahon v. Social Security Administration, Commissioner of · filed 2023-04-07(a)(4)(v)

The fourth and fifth steps of the analysis depend on the claimant’s residual functional capacity (RFC), which the Commissioner assesses after completing the third analytical step. 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520(e). A claimant’s RFC is the most the claimant can do despite limitations. Id. § 404.1545(a)(1). The Commissioner determines the claimant’s RFC based on all relevant evidence in the record. SSR 16-3p, 2017 WL 5180304, at *4–*5 (Oct. 25, 2017). After analyzing the claimant’s RFC, the Commissioner proceeds to the fourth and fifth steps of the analysis. At step four, the Commissioner determines whether the claimant can perform his or her past relevant work in light of his or her RFC. 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520(a)(4)(iv). If so, the claimant is not disabled. Id. At step five, the Commissioner bears the burden to show—in light of the claimant’s RFC, age, education, and work experience—that suitable work “exists in significant numbers in the national economy.” Id. §§ 404.1520(a)(4)(v), 404.1560(c)(2).

Section 404.1520 requires disability claims to be evaluated through five steps: substantial gainful activity, severity, listed impairment, past relevant work, and other work in the national economy.

Joel L. v. Kijakazi · filed 2023-06-20

The ALJ must follow five steps in evaluating a claim of disability. See 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1520, 416.920. First, if a claimant is working at a substantial gainful activity, she is not disabled. 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520(b). Second, if a claimant does not have any impairment or combination of impairments which significantly limit her physical or mental ability to do basic work activities, then she does not have a severe impairment and is not disabled. 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520(c). Third, if a claimant’s impairments meet or equal an impairment listed in 20 C.F.R. Part 404, Subpart P, Appendix 1, she is disabled. 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520(d). Fourth, if a claimant’s impairments do not prevent her from doing past relevant work, she is not disabled. 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520(e). Fifth, if a claimant’s impairments (considering her residual functional capacity, age, education, and past work) prevent her from doing other work that exists in the national economy, then she is disabled. 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520(f).

Section 404.1520 requires an ALJ to use a five-step sequential evaluation process to determine whether a claimant is disabled.

Pardini v. Kijakazi · filed 2023-06-29

The ALJ must consider all evidence in the claimant’s case record to determine disability (see id. at § 416.920(a)(3)) and must use a five-step sequential evaluation process to determine whether the claimant is disabled. Id. at § 416.920; see also id. at § 404.1520.

Section 404.1520 treats the ability to perform past relevant work as step four and considers other work in the national economy at step five.

Smajic v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2023-08-30

This is incorrect, as the ability of plaintiff to perform past relevant work is determined at step four. 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520. Step five concerns whether there is other work in the national economy that plaintiff can perform. (Id.).

Section 404.1520(e) requires the ALJ at step four to determine whether a claimant can perform past relevant work, and a denial is proper when substantial evidence supports that determination.

Green v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2023-09-08(e)

Step 4 of the sequential analysis requires the ALJ to determine whether an applicant is capable of performing her past relevant work. See 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520(e). Where substantial evidence supports the ALJ's conclusion that a claimant can perform her past relevant work, the Commissioner's denial of benefits is proper. See Walters, 127 F.3d at 529.

Section 404.1520 requires disability claims to be evaluated through a five-step sequence, with the claimant bearing the burden through step four and the Commissioner bearing it at step five.

Julie D. v. O'Malley · filed 2024-01-19

The ALJ must follow five steps in evaluating a claim of disability. See 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1520, 416.920. First, if a claimant is working at a substantial gainful activity, she is not disabled. 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520(b). Second, if a claimant does not have any impairment or combination of impairments which significantly limit her physical or mental ability to do basic work activities, then she does not have a severe impairment and is not disabled. 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520(c). Third, if a claimant’s impairments meet or equal an impairment listed in 20 C.F.R. Part 404, Subpart P, Appendix 1, she is disabled. 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520(d). Fourth, if a claimant’s impairments do not prevent her from doing past relevant work, she is not disabled. 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520(e). Fifth, if a claimant’s impairments (considering her residual functional capacity, age, education, and past work) prevent her from doing other work that exists in the national economy, then she is disabled. 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520(f). Significantly, the claimant bears the burden of proof at steps one through four, but the Commissioner bears the burden at step five. Wells v. Barnhart, 267 F. Supp. 2d 138, 144 (D. Mass. 2003) (five-step process applies to both SSDI and SSI claims).

Section 404.1520(a) requires an ALJ to determine disability through a five-step process, ending the inquiry when a claimant is or is not disabled at an applicable step.

Songer v. Commissioner of Social Security Administration · filed 2024-09-20(a)

To determine whether a claimant is disabled for purposes of the Act, the ALJ follows a five-step process. 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520(a). The claimant bears the burden of proof on the first four steps, but the burden shifts to the Commissioner at step five. Tackett v. Apfel, 180 F.3d 1094, 1098 (9th Cir. 1999). At the first step, the ALJ determines whether the claimant is presently engaging in substantial gainful activity. 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520(a)(4)(i). If so, the claimant is not disabled, and the inquiry ends. Id. At step two, the ALJ determines whether the claimant has a “severe” medically determinable physical or mental impairment. 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520(a)(4)(ii). If not, the claimant is not disabled, and the inquiry ends. Id. At step three, the ALJ considers whether the claimant’s impairment or combination of impairments meets or medically equals an impairment listed in Appendix 1 to Subpart P of 20 C.F.R. Part 404. See 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520(a)(4)(iii). If so, the claimant is automatically found to be disabled. Id. If not, the ALJ proceeds to step four. Id. At step four, the ALJ assesses the claimant’s RFC and determines whether the claimant is still capable of performing past relevant work. 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520(a)(4)(iv). If so, the claimant is not disabled, and the inquiry ends. Id. If not, the ALJ proceeds to the fifth and final step, where he determines whether the claimant can perform any other work in the national economy based on the claimant’s RFC, age, education, and work experience. 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520(a)(4)(v). If so, the claimant is not disabled. Id. If not, the claimant is disabled. Id.

Section 404.1520 requires an ALJ to evaluate disability claims through a five-step sequential process, with the claimant bearing the burden through step four and the Commissioner at step five.

James v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2024-10-22

An ALJ is required to follow a five-step sequential analysis to make a disability determination: 1. Is the claimant engaged in substantial gainful activity? If so, the claimant is not disabled. 2. Does the claimant have a medically determinable impairment, or a combination of impairments, that is “severe”? If not, the claimant is not disabled. 3. Does the claimant’s impairment meet or equal one of the listed impairments and meet the duration requirement? If so, the claimant is disabled. If not, the ALJ proceeds to the next step. 4. What is the claimant’s residual functional capacity and can the claimant perform past relevant work? If so, the claimant is not disabled. If not, the ALJ proceeds to the next step. 5. Can the claimant do any other work considering the claimant’s residual functional capacity, age, education, and work experience? If so, the claimant is not disabled. If not, the claimant is disabled. 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1520, 416.920; see Jordan v. Comm’r of Soc. Sec., 548 F.3d 417, 422 (6th Cir. 2008). Under this sequential analysis, the claimant has the burden of proof at steps one through four. Jordan, 548 F.3d at 423. The burden shifts to the Commissioner at step five “to prove the availability of jobs in the national economy that the claimant is capable of performing.” Id. “The claimant, however, retains the burden of proving her lack of residual functional capacity.” Id. If a claimant satisfies each element of the analysis and meets the duration requirements, the claimant is determined to be disabled. Walters Comm’r of Soc. Sec., 127 F.3d 525, 529 (6th Cir. 1997).

Section 404.1520 requires disability claims to be evaluated sequentially through substantial gainful activity, severe impairment, listed impairment, residual functional capacity and past work, and finally the claimant's ability to perform other work.

Faught v. Social Security Administration, Commissioner · filed 2025-02-25

Disability under the Act is determined under a five-step test. 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520. First, the ALJ must determine whether the claimant is engaging in substantial gainful activity. Id. § 404.1520(a)(4)(i). “Substantial gainful activity” is defined as activity that is both “substantial” and “gainful.” Id. § 1572. “Substantial” work activity is work that involves doing significant physical or mental activities. Id. § 404.1572(a). “Gainful” work activity is work that is done for pay or profit. Id. § 404.1572(b). If the ALJ finds that the claimant engages in activity that meets both of these criteria, then the claimant cannot claim disability. Id. § 404.1520(b). Second, the ALJ must determine whether the claimant has a medically determinable impairment or a combination of medical impairments that significantly limits the claimant’s ability to perform basic work activities. Id. § 404.1520(a)(4)(ii). Absent such impairment, the claimant may not claim disability. Id. Third, the ALJ must determine whether the claimant’s impairment meets or medically equals the criteria of an impairment listed in 20 C.F.R. § 404, Subpart P, Appendix 1. See id. §§ 404.1520(d), 404.1525, and 404.1526. If such criteria are met, the claimant is declared disabled. Id. § 404.1520(a)(4)(iii). If the claimant does not fulfill the requirements necessary to be declared disabled under the third step, the ALJ may still find disability under the next two steps of the analysis. The ALJ must first determine the claimant’s residual functional capacity (“RFC”), which refers to the claimant’s ability to work despite her impairments. 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520(e). In the fourth step, the ALJ determines whether the claimant has the RFC to perform past relevant work. Id. § 404.1520(a)(4)(iv). If the claimant is determined to be capable of performing past relevant work, then the claimant is deemed not disabled. Id. If the ALJ finds the claimant unable to perform past relevant work, then the analysis proceeds to the fifth and final step. Id. § 404.1520(a)(4)(v). In the last part of the analysis, the ALJ must determine whether the claimant is able to perform any other work commensurate with her RFC, age, education, and work experience. Id. § 404.1520(g). Here, the burden of proof shifts from the claimant to the ALJ to prove the existence, in significant numbers, of jobs in the national economy that the claimant can do given her RFC, age, education, and work experience. Id. §§ 404.1520(g), 404.1560(c).

Section 404.1520(a)(4)(i)–(v) requires disability eligibility to be evaluated through five sequential steps addressing substantial gainful activity, severe impairment, listed impairments, past work, and other work.

Jenkins · filed 2025-09-08(a)(4)(i)–(v)

A claimant’s eligibility for disability benefits is evaluated pursuant to a five-step sequential analysis: 1. The Commissioner considers whether the claimant is currently engaged in substantial gainful activity. 2. If not, the Commissioner considers whether the claimant has a “severe impairment” which limits his or her mental or physical ability to do basic work activities. 3. If the claimant has a “severe impairment,” the Commissioner must ask whether, based solely on medical evidence, claimant has an impairment listed in Appendix 1 of the regulations. If the claimant has one of these enumerated impairments, the Commissioner will automatically consider him disabled, without considering vocational factors such as age, education, and work experience. 4. If the impairment is not “listed” in the regulations, the Commissioner then asks whether, despite the claimant's severe impairment, he or she has residual functional capacity to perform his or her past work. 5. If the claimant is unable to perform his or her past work, the Commissioner then determines whether there is other work which the claimant could perform. See Rolon v. Commissioner of Soc. Sec., 994 F. Supp. 2d 496, 503 (S.D.N.Y. 2014); see also 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1520(a)(4)(i)–(v), 416.920(a)(4)(i)–(v).

Section 404.1520 requires disability claims to proceed through a sequential evaluation, and an error in classifying an impairment at step two does not require reversal when another impairment is severe and the ALJ proceeds to consider all impairments in the later evaluation.

Allen · filed 2026-02-13

Even if there was an error, then, the ALJ's failure to consider Plaintiff's mental health impairments 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 the ALJ finds at least one “severe” impairment and therefore 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.

Section 404.1520 requires disability claims to be evaluated through a five-step process addressing work activity, impairment severity, listed impairments, past work, and other work.

Andrews v. Astrue · filed 2013-01-09

To determine whether a claimant is disabled, and thus entitled to disability benefits, a five-step analysis is employed. 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1520(a)(4), 416.920(a)(4). First, the claimant must not be presently working at any substantial gainful activity. Id. §§ 404.1520(b), 416.920(b). “Substantial gainful activity” is defined as work activity “that involves doing significant physical or mental activities ... for pay or profit.” Id. §§ 404.1572, 416.972. Second, the claimant must have an impairment or combination of impairments that is severe. Id. §§ 404.1520(c), 461.920(c); see also Stone v. Heckler, 752 F.2d 1099, 1101 (5th Cir.1985), cited in Loza v. Apfel, 219 F.3d 378, 392 (5th Cir.2000). Third, disability will be found if the impairment or combination of impairments meets or equals an impairment contained in the Listing of Impairments (“Listing”), 20 C.F.R. Pt. 404, Subpt. P, App. 1. 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1520(d), 416.920(d). Fourth, if disability cannot be found on the basis of the claimant’s medical status alone, the impairment or impairments must prevent the claimant from returning to her past relevant work. Id. §§ 404.1520(f), 416.920(f). And fifth, the impairment must prevent the claimant from doing any work, considering the claimant’s residual functional capacity, age, education, and past work experience. Id. §§ 404.1520(g), 416.920(g); Crowley v. Apfel, 197 F.3d 194, 197-98 (5th Cir.1999).

Section 404.1520 sets out a five-step process for evaluating adult disability claims, including whether an impairment equals a listed impairment and whether the claimant can perform past or other work.

Rooney v. Shalala · filed 1995-03-14

At each level of review, determinations of disability are founded on a five-step sequential evaluation outlined in 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520. ... 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520 allows for situations in which a claimant’s impairment might be deemed to “equal” a listed impairment. The ALJ’s refusal to find that the combination of some number of Mrs. Rooney’s multiple impairments was equivalent to a listed impairment is remarkable. ... The inquiry might well have ended with this step-three finding of impairment equivalence, but the ALJ refused to find such an equivalence, and this court cannot say that the refusal was arbitrary.

Section 404.1520 establishes a five-step sequential process for determining whether an adult claimant is disabled.

Kokal v. Massanari · filed 2001-09-18

The SSA uses a five-step sequential evaluation process to determine whether a claimant is disabled. See 20 C.F.R. 404.1520; see also Bowen v. Yuckert, 482 U.S. 137, 140-41, 107 S.Ct. 2287, 96 L.Ed.2d 119 (1987); Reddick, 157 F.3d at 721. First, the SSA determines whether the claimant is engaged in substantial gainful activity. See 20 C.F.R. 404.1520(b). If the claimant is not engaged in substantial gainful activity, the SSA proceeds to step two to determine whether the claimant has a medically severe impairment or combination of impairments. See 20 C.F.R. 404.1520(c).

Section 404.1520 requires disability claims to be evaluated through a five-step sequential process, with the Commissioner bearing the burden at step five to show that the claimant can perform other work existing in significant numbers.

Arnold v. SSA · filed 2001-11-15

Arnold’s application was denied at step five of the sequential evaluation process set forth in 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520. ... At the fifth step, the Acting Commissioner has the burden to show that despite the claimant’s severe impairment, she retained the residual functional capacity to do work other than her past work during the covered period and that work the claimant can do exists in significant numbers in the relevant economies.

Section 404.1520 requires disability claims to be evaluated through a five-step sequential process.

Callahan v. Barnhart · filed 2002-01-30(a)

The administrative law judge, in compliance with the five-step sequential evaluation process outlined in 20 C.F.R. section 404.1520(a), considered Callahan’s conditions at length and made specific and well-articulated findings as to the effect of the combinations of impairments.

Section 404.1520 requires the Commissioner to use a five-step sequential evaluation to determine whether an adult claimant is disabled, with the burden shifting to the Commissioner at step five.

Frazee v. Barnhart · filed 2003-04-28

To determine whether a claimant is disabled, the Commissioner applies a five-step sequential evaluation: (1) whether the claimant is currently working; (2) whether the claimant suffers from a severe impairment or combination of impairments; (3) whether the impairment meets an impairment listed in Appendix 1 of the relevant regulation; (4) whether the impairment prevents the claimant from continuing her past relevant work; and (5) whether the impairment prevents the claimant from doing any kind of work. 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1520, 416.920 (1996).

Section 404.1520 requires a five step disability evaluation and places the burden on the Commissioner to identify specific jobs at step five.

Thompson v. Barnhart · filed 2003-09-10(a)(4)

Under the medical-vocational regulations, as promulgated by the Commissioner, a five-step sequential evaluation is to be utilized to evaluate disability claims. ... (5) Does the claimant’s impairment prevent him from doing any other work which exists in the national or regional economy? ... After a claimant shows an inability to return to his customary occupation, the Government bears the burden of showing that a claimant can perform specific jobs that existed in significant numbers in the national economy. ... Here, no such testimony or findings appear, contrary to regulatory and judicial mandate. ... Having failed to elicit such testimony, and having failed to otherwise make such a finding in the January 30, 2002 decision, the Court will remand for further proceedings.

Section 404.1520 establishes a five-step process for deciding disability claims, with the claimant bearing the burden through the first four steps and the Commissioner bearing it at step five.

King v. Barnhart · filed 2005-03-17

An ALJ must engage in a five-step sequential inquiry to determine whether the claimant is capable of performing “substantial gainful activity,” or is, in fact, disabled: ... 1. An individual who is working and engaging in substantial gainful activity will not be found disabled regardless of the medical findings. ... 2. An individual who does not have a “severe impairment” will not be found to be disabled. ... 3. An individual who “meets or equals a listed impairment in Appendix 1” of the regulations will be considered disabled without consideration of vocational factors. ... 4. If an individual is capable of performing the work he has done in the past, a finding of “not disabled” must be made. ... 5. If an individual’s impairment precludes performance of his past work, then other factors, including age, education, past work experience, and residual functional capacity must be considered to determine if any work can be performed. ... The claimant has the burden to prove disability under the first four steps. ... If the claimant successfully carries this burden, the burden shifts to the Commissioner at step five to show that other substantial gainful employment is available in the national economy, which the claimant is capable of performing.

Section 404.1520 establishes a five-step disability evaluation process, including the step-three listing inquiry and the allocation of burdens.

Carpenter v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2015-08-17

The Social Security Administration regulations establish a five-step, sequential evaluation process by which the Commissioner determines whether a claimant is disabled, and thus entitled to benefits. Winschel, 631 F.3d at 1178; 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1520(a)(4), 404.1520a(a). ... If the claimant does not meet his burden on either inquiry, he is determined to be “not disabled” regardless of his age, education, and work experience. 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520(a)(4)(i)–(ii), (b)–(c).

Section 404.1520(a)(4) requires a five-step sequential evaluation for disability determinations.

Garcia v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2015-08-18(a)(4)

Administrative regulations require a five-step sequential evaluation for disability determinations. 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520(a)(4).

Section 404.1520 establishes a five-step disability evaluation in which severe impairments are assessed at step two and qualifying listed impairments end the analysis at step three.

Ash v. Colvin · filed 2016-02-04(c), (d)

The ALJ analyzed Ash’s claim under the five-step sequential evaluation process used to consider disability claims. ... A claimant who meets the listing at step three is considered conclusively disabled, and the analysis does not continue to steps four and five. ... A “severe” impairment at step two 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), so the ALJ must have found that Ash’s mental impairment satisfied this standard.

Section 404.1520 establishes a five-step sequential process for determining disability, with the claimant bearing the burden through the first four steps and the Commissioner bearing it at the final step.

Gonzalez v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2021-01-05(b), (c), (d), (e), (f), and (g)

The applicable regulations set forth a five-step analysis the Commissioner must follow in determining eligibility for disability insurance benefits. ... The first step is to determine whether the applicant is engaged in substantial gainful activity during the period for which benefits are claimed. 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1520(b) and 416.920(b). ... The next step is to determine whether the applicant has a severe impairment which significantly limits the physical or mental ability to do basic work activities as defined in the applicable regulations. 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1520(c) and 416.920(c). ... Third, if there is an impairment and the impairment, or an equivalent, is listed in Appendix 1 of the regulations and meets the duration requirement, the individual is deemed disabled, regardless of the applicant's age, education or work experience, 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1520(d) and 416.920(d), as, in such a case, there is a presumption the applicant with such an impairment is unable to perform substantial gainful activity. ... However, as a fourth step, if the impairment or its equivalent is not listed in Appendix 1, the Commissioner must then consider the applicant's "residual functional capacity" and the demands of any past work. 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1520(e), 416.920(e). ... Finally, if the applicant is unable to perform any past work, the Commissioner will consider the individual's "residual functional capacity," age, education and past work experience in order to determine whether the applicant can perform any alternative employment. 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1520(f), 416.920(f). ... If the Commissioner finds that the applicant cannot perform any other work, the applicant is considered disabled and eligible for disability benefits. 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1520(g), 416.920(g). ... The applicant bears the burden of proof as to the first four steps, while the Commissioner bears the burden of proof on the final step relating to other employment.

Section 404.1520 establishes a five-step sequential evaluation for disability claims, and the Commissioner stops the inquiry once disability is decided at a step.

Keffer v. Commissioner of Social Security Administration · filed 2021-01-05(a)(4)

An examiner must consider the following: (1) whether the claimant is engaged in substantial gainful activity; (2) whether she has a severe impairment; (3) whether that impairment meets or equals an impairment included in the Listings;3 (4) whether such impairment prevents claimant from performing PRW;4 and (5) whether the impairment prevents her from doing substantial gainful employment. 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1520, 416.920. These considerations are sometimes referred to as the “five steps” of the Commissioner’s disability analysis. If a decision regarding disability may be made at any step, no further inquiry is necessary. 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1520(a)(4), 416.920(a)(4) (providing that if Commissioner can find claimant disabled or not disabled at a step, Commissioner makes determination and does not go on to the next step).

Section 404.1520 uses a five-step sequential disability analysis; meeting or equaling every criterion of a listed impairment for at least one year establishes disability without further assessment, and the analysis ends when disability is decided at any step.

Rife v. Commissioner of Social Security Administration · filed 2021-01-07(a)(4)(iii), (a)(4)

To facilitate a uniform and efficient processing of disability claims, regulations promulgated under the Act have reduced the statutory definition of disability to a series of five sequential questions. ... If the medical evidence shows a claimant meets or equals all criteria of any of the Listed impairments for at least one year, he will be found disabled without further assessment. 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520(a)(4)(iii). ... These considerations are sometimes referred to as the “five steps” of the Commissioner’s disability analysis. If a decision regarding disability may be made at any step, no further inquiry is necessary. 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520(a)(4) (providing that if Commissioner can find claimant disabled or not disabled at a step, Commissioner makes determination and does not go on to the next step).

Section 404.1520 requires the Commissioner to use a five-step analysis to determine eligibility for disability benefits.

Patterson v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2021-05-03(a)(4)

The applicable regulations set forth a five-step analysis the Commissioner must follow in determining eligibility for disability benefits. 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1520 and 416.920.

Section 404.1520 requires the Commissioner to use a five-step sequential process to determine whether a claimant is disabled, including assessing residual functional capacity and the ability to perform past or other work.

Bernard v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2021-02-17(a)(4)

The applicable regulations set forth a five-step analysis the Commissioner must follow in determining eligibility for disability benefits. 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1520 and 416.920. ... As a fourth step, however, if the impairment or its equivalent is not listed in Appendix 1, the Commissioner must then consider the applicant’s “residual functional capacity” or “RFC” which is the ability to perform physical or mental work activities on a sustained basis, notwithstanding the limitations posed by the applicant’s collective impairments, see 20 C.F.R. 404.1520(e)-(f), and 416.920(e)-(f), and the demands of any past relevant work (“PRW”). 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1520(e) and 416.920(e). If the applicant remains capable of performing PRW, disability benefits will be denied, id., but if the applicant is unable to perform PRW relevant work, the Commissioner, at the fifth step, must consider whether, given the applicant’s age, education, and past work experience, the applicant “retains a residual functional capacity to perform alternative substantial gainful work which exists in the national economy.” Rosa v. Callahan, 168 F.3d 72, 77 (2d Cir. 1999) (quotation marks and citation omitted); 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1560(c) and 416.960(c).

Section 404.1520(a)(4) establishes a five-step process for determining disability, and an error at the nonseverity step is harmless when the ALJ properly considers the impairment at later steps, including in the RFC analysis.

Crabtree v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2021-08-27(a)(4)

The ALJ follows a five-step process when determining a claimant’s disability status. See 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520(a)(4)(i–v). Even if the ALJ determines that an ailment is nonsevere, he must nonetheless consider the ailment when evaluating a claimant’s RFC. Emard v. Comm’r of Soc. Sec., 953 F.3d 844, 851 (6th Cir. 2020); see also 20 C.F.R. § 416.945(e). As Magistrate Judge Lee correctly noted, so long as one severe ailment is found, “an erroneous finding of non-severity at step two is [] harmless where the ALJ properly considers nonsevere impairments at later steps.” Id. at 852 (citing Maziarz v. Sec’y of Health & Hum. Servs., 837 F.2d 240, 244 (6th Cir. 1987)).

Section 404.1520 uses a five-step process to determine disability, requiring consideration of substantial gainful activity, severe impairment, listed impairments, past relevant work, and other work available in significant numbers in the national economy.

Franklin v. Saul · filed 2022-01-28(a)(4)

A five-step regulatory framework is used to determine whether an individual is disabled. 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520(a)(4); see also Bowen v. Yuckert, 482 U.S. 137, 140-42 (1987) (describing five-step process); Pates-Fires, 564 F.3d at 942. Steps One through Three require the claimant to prove: (1) she is not currently engaged in substantial gainful activity; (2) she suffers from a severe impairment; and (3) her condition meets or equals a listed impairment. 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520(a)(4)(i)-(iii). If the claimant does not suffer from a listed impairment or its equivalent, the Commissioner’s analysis proceeds to Steps Four and Five. Step Four requires the Commissioner to consider whether the claimant retains the RFC to perform her past relevant work (PRW). Id. § 404.1520(a)(4)(iv). The claimant bears the burden of demonstrating she is no longer able to do so. Pate-Fires, 564 F.3d at 942. If the Commissioner determines the claimant cannot return to her PRW, the burden shifts to the Commissioner at Step Five to show the claimant retains the RFC to perform other work that exists in significant numbers in the national economy. Id.; 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520(a)(4)(v).

Section 404.1520 establishes a five-step sequential disability determination and ends the inquiry when the Commissioner can find a claimant disabled or not disabled at a step.

Moore v. Commissioner of Social Security Administration · filed 2022-03-15(a)(4)

These considerations are sometimes referred to as the “five steps” of the Commissioner’s disability analysis. If a decision regarding disability may be made at any step, no further inquiry is necessary. 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520(a)(4) (providing that if Commissioner can find claimant disabled or not disabled at a step, Commissioner makes determination and does not go on to the next step).

Section 404.1520 requires a five-step disability analysis, with the claimant bearing the burden through the first four steps and the Commissioner bearing it at the final step.

Crawford v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2022-07-26

The applicable regulations set forth a five-step analysis the Commissioner must follow in determining eligibility for disability benefits. 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1520 and 416.920. ... The burden of proof is on the applicant for the first four steps, with the Commissioner bearing the burden of proof on the final step. 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1520(a)(4) and 416.920(a)(4); Burgess v. Astrue, 537 F.3d 117, 128 (2d Cir. 2008).

Section 404.1520(c) requires an impairment to significantly limit a claimant’s ability to do basic work activities to be considered severe and proceed to step three; otherwise, the claimant is not disabled.

Chagas v. Kijakazi · filed 2024-09-26(c)

The SSA regulations set forth a five-step sequential evaluation process for determining whether a claimant is disabled. 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520(a)(4). ... 2. Is the claimant’s impairment severe? If so, proceed to step three. If not, then the claimant is not disabled. See 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1520(c), 416.920(c). ... Therefore, a conclusion that a claimant does not suffer from a medically severe impairment must be “clearly established by medical evidence.” Webb v. Barnhart, 433 F.3d 683, 687 (9th Cir. 2005) (citation omitted). ... Here, the AC concluded that Chagas suffered from bipolar disorder prior to November 20, 2004. AR 6. However, it found Chagas’ impairment to be non-severe because of the gap in treatment between May 2005 and April 2007. AR 6. The medical records do not clearly establish that Chagas’ impairment was not severe. See Webb, 433 F.3d at 687. ... The Court finds the AC’s conclusion unsupported by substantial evidence.

Section 404.1520 requires an ALJ to determine disability through a five-step sequential analysis, including substantial gainful activity, severe impairment, and listed-impairment inquiries.

PFLEGER v. COMMISSIONER OF SOCIAL SECURITY · filed 2025-01-17(a)

To make a disability determination, the ALJ follows a five-step, sequential analysis. 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520(a); Hess v. Comm’r of Soc. Sec., 931 F.3d 198, 201–03 (3d Cir. 2019). The ALJ determines whether the claimant: first, is currently engaged in substantial gainful activity (“SGA”); second, has a “severe” and “medically determinable” impairment; and third, has an impairment, or combination thereof, that is equal to or exceeds one of those included in the Listing of Impairments in 20 C.F.R. Part 404, Subpart P, Appendix 1, 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1520(a)(4)(i)–(iii).

Section 404.1520(a)(4)(i)-(v) requires an ALJ to use a five-step process to determine whether a claimant is entitled to benefits.

Watkins v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2025-04-14(a)(4)(i)-(v)

Social Security regulations outline a five-step process the ALJ must use to determine whether a claimant is entitled to benefits: 1. whether the claimant is engaged in substantial gainful activity; 2. if not, whether the claimant has a severe impairment or combination of impairments; 3. if so, whether that impairment, or combination of impairments, meets or equals any of the listings in 20 C.F.R. Part 404, Subpart P, Appendix 1; 4. if not, whether the claimant can perform their past relevant work in light of his RFC; and 5. if not, whether, based on the claimant’s age, education, and work experience, they can perform other work found in the national economy. 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520(a)(4)(i)-(v)1; Combs v. Comm’r of Soc. Sec., 459 F.3d 640, 642-43 (6th Cir. 2006).

Section 404.1520 requires an ALJ to use a five-step process to determine whether a claimant is entitled to Social Security benefits.

Flasco v. Commissioner of the Social Security Administration · filed 2025-05-05(a)(4)(i)-(v)

Social Security regulations outline a five-step process the ALJ must use to determine whether a claimant is entitled to benefits: 1. whether the claimant is engaged in substantial gainful activity; 2. if not, whether the claimant has a severe impairment or combination of impairments; 3. if so, whether that impairment, or combination of impairments, meets or equals any of the listings in 20 C.F.R. Part 404, Subpart P, Appendix 1; 4. if not, whether the claimant can perform their past relevant work in light of his RFC; and 5. if not, whether, based on the claimant’s age, education, and work experience, they can perform other work found in the national economy.

At step five, the Commissioner determines disability by considering whether the claimant’s impairments prevent other relevant work in light of the claimant’s residual functional capacity, age, work experience, and education.

West v. Commissioner, Social Security Administration · filed 2025-07-16(a)(4)(v)

To be disabling, an impairment must prevent a claimant from obtaining gainful employment considering her RFC, age, work experience, and education. 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520(a)(4)(v). To find a claimant not disabled, the Commissioner must show that there are a “significant number of jobs” available for the claimant within the national economy.

Section 404.1520 requires the Commissioner to use a five-step disability-eligibility analysis, with the applicant bearing the burden through the first four steps and the Commissioner at the final step.

Purpura v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2025-09-09(a)(4)

The applicable regulations set forth a five-step analysis the Commissioner must follow in determining eligibility for disability benefits. ... The burden of proof is on the applicant for the first four steps, with the Commissioner bearing the burden of proof on the final step. 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1520(a)(4) and 416.920(a)(4); Burgess v. Astrue, 537 F.3d 117, 128 (2d Cir. 2008).

Section 404.1520 requires the Commissioner to evaluate disability claims in five sequential steps, ending the inquiry when an early step resolves eligibility and assigning the claimant the burden through the fourth step and the Commissioner the burden at the fifth.

Kirkland v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2025-09-23

The applicable regulations set forth a five-step analysis the Commissioner must follow in determining eligibility for disability benefits. 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1520 and 416.920. ... The first step is to determine whether the applicant is engaged in substantial gainful activity during the period for which the benefits are claimed. 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1520(b) and 416.920(b). 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). ... The burden of proof is on the applicant for the first four steps, with the Commissioner bearing the burden of proof on the final step. 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1520(a)(4) and 416.920(a)(4); Burgess v. Astrue, 537 F.3d 117, 128 (2d Cir. 2008). All five steps need not be addressed because if the claimant fails to meet the criteria at either of the first two steps, the inquiry ceases and the claimant is not eligible for disability benefits, but if the claimant meets the criteria for the third or fourth step, the inquiry ceases with the claimant eligible for disability benefits. 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1520 and 416.920.

At step five, the Commissioner must establish that the claimant can perform other work existing in the national economy before finding the claimant not disabled.

Williams-Leirmo v. Commissioner Social Security Administration · filed 2021-08-04(g)

At step five, the Commissioner must determine if the claimant is capable of performing work existing in the national economy. ... Thus, I find the ALJ’s decision is not supported by substantial evidence, and the Commissioner did not meet the burden at step five.

The claimant bears the burden of proof when the ALJ assesses residual functional capacity before step four.

Connors v. Commissioner Social Security · filed 2022-09-08(a)(4)(iv), (e)

But Connors disputes the ALJ’s RFC determination (i.e., whether Connors “could meet a job requiring her to be on her feet all day,” Connors Br. 40), an assessment the ALJ made before step four, when Connors still had the burden of proof.

At steps four and five, the ALJ considers residual functional capacity to decide whether the claimant can perform past work or other work.

Davis v. Social Security Administration, Commissioner · filed 2022-03-14(a)(4)(iv)-(v)

To determine if a claimant can perform work, the ALJ must assess his RFC, which is the most the claimant can do despite his impairments. 20 C.F.R. 404.1520(a)(4)(iv)-(v), 416.920(a)(4)(iv)-(v). ... Because the ALJ found Davis could perform a full range of sedentary work, reliance on the Grids was proper.

At step four, inability to perform past relevant work establishes a prima facie case of disability; at step five, the burden shifts to the ALJ to show the claimant can perform work in the national economy considering the claimant’s residual functional capacity, age, education, and work experience.

Hennessey, II v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2021-03-25(e), (f)

Step four involves a determination of whether the claimant’s impairments prevent him or her from performing his or her past relevant work. If the claimant cannot perform his or her past relevant work, then a prima facie case of disability is established. 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520(e). The burden then shifts to the ALJ to show at step five that, despite the claimant’s impairments, he or she is able to perform work in the national economy in light of the claimant’s residual functioning capacity, age, education, and work experience. 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520(f); Phillips, 357 F. 3d at 1239.

At steps four and five, an ALJ may account for moderate difficulties in concentration, persistence, or pace with a simple-tasks limitation if the ALJ gives a valid explanation.

Russell Hess, III v. Commissioner Social Security · filed 2019-07-30(a)(4)(iv)-(v)

Turning to the merits, the government is correct that, as long as the ALJ offers a “valid explanation,” a “simple tasks” limitation is permitted after a finding that a claimant has “moderate” difficulties in “concentration, persistence, or pace.”

Section 404.1520(a) requires disability determinations to proceed through five sequential questions concerning substantial gainful activity, impairment severity, listed impairments, past work, and other work.

Jones v. Social Security Administration, Commissioner · filed 2021-02-25(a)

A determination of disability under the Social Security Act requires a five-step analysis. 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520(a). The Commissioner must determine in sequence: (1) Is the claimant presently unable to engage in substantial gainful activity? (2) Are the claimant’s impairments severe? (3) Do the claimant’s impairments satisfy or medically equal one of the specific impairments set forth in 20 C.F.R. Pt. 404, Subpt. P, App. 1? (4) Is the claimant unable to perform her former occupation? (5) Is the claimant unable to perform other work given her residual functional capacity, age, education, and work experience? See Frame v. Comm’r, Soc. Sec. Admin., 596 F. App’x 908, 910 (11th Cir. 2015).

Section 404.1520(a)(3) requires the ALJ to consider all evidence in the claimant’s case record when making a disability determination.

Rieves v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2021-03-02(a)(3)

The ALJ is required to consider all the evidence in the record when making a disability determination. See 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520(a)(3). ... The Court agrees with Plaintiff that the ALJ’s failure to account for (or properly discount) Dr. Oliveros’s opinion warrants a remand.

Section 404.1520(a)(3) requires an ALJ to consider all evidence in the case record when deciding whether a claimant is disabled.

Rathbun v. Social Security Administration · filed 2023-08-11(a)(3)

“The regulations require the ALJ to consider all evidence in the case record when he makes a determination or decision whether claimant is disabled.”

Section 404.1520(a)(3) requires the ALJ to consider all evidence in the case record when deciding whether a claimant is disabled, although the ALJ need not discuss every piece of evidence.

Rader v. Social Security Administration · filed 2025-09-24(a)(3)

“The regulations require the ALJ to consider all evidence in the case record when he makes a determination or decision whether claimant is disabled.” ... “Although the ALJ is required only to consider all the evidence and is not required to discuss everything in the record, the ALJ’s own analysis makes it clear the ALJ did not consider the records the Commissioner cites.”

At step two, an ALJ determines whether a claimant has a severe impairment; if the claimant has a severe impairment, the ALJ must consider both severe and non-severe impairments at later steps, including the RFC determination.

Briscoe v. Commissioner, Social Security · filed 2021-03-12(a)(4)(ii)

At step two of the five step sequential analysis set out in the Social Security regulations, an ALJ must determine whether the claimant has an impairment or combination of impairments that is severe. See 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1520(a)(4)(ii), 416.920(a)(4)(ii). During step two, if an ALJ determines that a claimant has no severe impairments, the claimant is not found disabled and the sequential analysis does not proceed to further steps. Louise H. v. Comm’r., Soc. Sec. Admin., ADC Civ. No. 18-3922, 2019 WL 5309997, at * 5 (D. Md. Oct. 21, 2019); 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1520(a)(4)(ii), 416.920(a)(4)(ii)). “However, if a claimant does have a severe impairment or combination of impairments, the ALJ must consider the effects of both the severe and non-severe impairments at the subsequent steps of the process, including the determination of RFC.”

At step two, § 404.1520(c) treats an impairment as severe when it significantly limits the claimant’s ability to perform basic work activities.

Pickett v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2021-03-31(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(c) treats an impairment as severe when it significantly limits a claimant’s physical or mental ability to perform basic work activities; a slight abnormality that does not significantly limit those abilities is not severe.

Presson v. Kijakazi · filed 2021-06-22(c)

At Step Two of the evaluation process, an ALJ must determine if a plaintiff suffers from a severe impairment. Kirby v. Astrue, 500 F.3d 705, 707 (8th Cir. 2007). The plaintiff bears the burden of proving his impairment or combination of impairments is severe, but the burden is not a heavy one, and any doubt concerning whether the showing has been made must be resolved in favor of the plaintiff. Id.; Dewald v. Astrue, 590 F. Supp. 2d 1184, 1200 (D.S.D. 2008). “Severity is not an onerous requirement for the [plaintiff] to meet, but it is also not a toothless standard[.]” Kirby, 500 F.3d at 707. A severe impairment is an impairment or combination of impairments that significantly limits a plaintiff’s physical or mental ability to perform basic work activities. See 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1520(c), 404.1521. An impairment is not severe if it amounts to only a slight abnormality and does not significantly limit the plaintiff’s physical or mental ability to do basic work activities. Kirby, 500 F.3d at 707; 20 C.F.R. § 404.1521(a).

Section 404.1520(c) requires the ALJ at step two to determine whether a claimant has a medically severe impairment or combination of impairments; if not, the disability claim is denied.

Vargas-Gonzalez v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2021-07-08(c)

As previously mentioned, at step 2, the ALJ must examine a claimant’s medical conditions and determine whether he or she has a medically severe impairment or combination of impairments. See § 404.1520(c). An impairment will be found not to be severe if it establishes only a slight abnormality or combination thereof which has no more than a de minimis effect on a person’s ability to perform basic work activities. McDonald v. Sec’y of Health & Hum. Servs., 795 F.2d 1118, 1124 (1st Cir. 1986). ... Taken as a whole, these findings provide substantial evidence for the ALJ to conclude that Plaintiff’s fibromyalgia was not a severe impairment. For these reasons, the Court finds Plaintiff’s argument that the ALJ failed to consider her fibromyalgia diagnosis unavailing, and on the contrary, finds that the ALJ’s conclusion as to this condition was buttressed by substantial evidence.

Section 404.1520(c) requires an impairment to significantly limit a claimant’s ability to perform basic work activities to qualify as severe at step two, and the ALJ must consider all relevant evidence before finding it nonsevere.

Boyan v. Commissioner of Social Security Administration · filed 2021-08-13(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 evidence Plaintiff cites to shows that there is more than a “slight abnormality” in her generalized anxiety disorder. ... Because the ALJ only cited to specific evidence supporting his finding that Plaintiff’s generalized anxiety disorder is nonsevere and failed to consider other relevant evidence, the Court finds the ALJ erred at step two.

At step two, § 404.1520(c) requires determining whether the claimant’s impairments are severe; an impairment is not severe if it causes no more than a minimal limitation on basic work activities.

Terrell v. Kijakazi · filed 2021-08-16(c)

At step two of the sequential analysis, the ALJ is required to determine whether a claimant’s impairments are severe. See 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520(c). ... 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. ... If the impairment would have no more than a minimal effect on the claimant’s ability to work, then it does not satisfy the requirement of step two.

At step two, the claimant must show a medically determinable impairment that is severe, but only by making a minimal showing.

Palmer v. Bisignano · filed 2025-11-10(a)(4)(ii), (c)

At step two, the ALJ must determine whether the claimant has made an adequate showing that he had severe impairments during the period for which he seeks disability benefits. 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1520(a)(4)(ii), 404.1520(c). To meet this standard, the claimant need only make a “de minimus” showing, Glanden v. Kijakazi, 86 F.4th 838, 843 (9th Cir. 2023), that he has a medically determinable impairment and that that impairment is severe.

At step two, the ALJ must determine whether an impairment is severe or non-severe, but failure to identify an impairment at that step does not necessarily require remand if its limiting effects are considered later.

OVERMAN · filed 2026-03-12(a)(4)(ii)

In this case, the Court agrees that the ALJ should have made a finding as to whether Claimant's agoraphobia with panic disorder was a medically determinable severe or non-severe impairment. 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520(a)(4)(ii). However, an ALJ's failure to recognize a medically determinable impairment at step two does not necessarily or presumptively require remand. 20 C.F.R. § 404.1523(c); Castile v. Astrue, 617 F.3d 923, 926 (7th Cir. 2010).

Section 404.1520(c) requires the ALJ at step two to determine whether the claimant has a severe impairment that significantly limits the ability to perform basic work activities; when the record is insufficient to make that determination, the ALJ must further develop it before proceeding.

Carter v. Saul · filed 2021-03-24(c)

At Step 2 of the five-step sequential evaluation process, the ALJ is required to assess the severity of the claimant’s physical and mental impairments. 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1520(c), 416.920(c). ... The Mercy Clinic records would have required the ALJ to further develop the record in order to make a threshold determination as to whether Ms. Carter’s episodes were psychogenic or neurological before performing the Step 2 analysis. ... Without further developing the record, the ALJ could not make the threshold determination at Step 2 and, therefore, could not proceed to Steps 3-5.

Section 404.1520(c) requires a claimant to have a severe impairment at Step 2, meaning an impairment with more than a minimal effect on the ability to work.

Feagans-King v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2021-09-15(c)

To be severe, for purposes of Step 2, the medically determinable impairment must have a more than minimal effect on the claimant’s ability to work. 20 C.F.R. 404.1520(c); SSR 85-28 (January 1, 1985). Drs. Deppe, Kravitz, and Gilliland all found that her impairment caused only mild limitations on her ability to function. These findings, along with the other evidence cited above, provided substantial evidence to support the ALJ’s finding that Feagans-King’s mental impairment was non-severe at Step 2. See 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520a(d)(1) (mild functional limitations indicates that a mental impairment is not severe).

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

Holloway v. Social Security Administration, Commissioner · filed 2022-06-10(c)

An impairment or combination of impairments is severe if it significantly limits a claimant’s ability to perform basic work activities. 20 CFR § 404.1520(c).

At step two, the agency determines whether the claimant has a severe medically determinable impairment, meaning one that significantly limits the ability to work.

Kimball v. P Kilolo Kijakazi, Acting Commissioner Social Security Administration · filed 2022-07-12(a)(4)(ii)

At Step 2, the ALJ reviews the record to determine whether the claimant has a severe medically determinable impairment. 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520(a)(4)(ii). ... An impairment is severe, at Step 2, if it significantly limits the claimant’s ability to work. § 404.1520(c). Any error at Step 2 is harmless if at least one severe medically determinable impairment is found, and the ALJ continues along the sequential analysis.

Section 404.1520 requires the ALJ to determine at Step 2 whether the claimant has a severe medically determinable impairment, meaning one that significantly limits the ability to work.

Kimball v. US Social Security Administration, Acting Commissioner · filed 2022-07-12(a)(4)(ii), (c)

At Step 2, the ALJ reviews the record to determine whether the claimant has a severe medically determinable impairment. 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520(a)(4)(ii). ... An impairment is severe, at Step 2, if it significantly limits the claimant’s ability to work. § 404.1520(c). Any error at Step 2 is harmless if at least one severe medically determinable impairment is found, and the ALJ continues along the sequential analysis. ... The ALJ found that Kimball had severe medically determinable impairments of a depressive disorder and an anxiety disorder. ... Therefore, Kimball has not shown any error, and even if error occurred, it would have been harmless.

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

Martinez v. Saul · filed 2022-09-26(c)

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), 416.920(c); see also Soc. Sec. Rul. 85-28, 1985 WL 56856 (S.S.A. 1985) (claim may be denied at Step 2 only if combination of impairments does not have “more than a minimal effect” on ability to perform basic work activities). ... Accordingly, substantial evidence supports the ALJ’s conclusion that the knee pain did not “significantly limit” plaintiff’s physical or mental ability to do basic work activities. See 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1520(c), 416.920 (c).

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

SMITH v. COMMISSIONER OF SOCIAL SECURITY · filed 2022-12-27(c)

Theresa S. did not furnish evidence to show that her diabetes is severe—i.e., that it “significantly limits [her] physical or mental ability to do basic work activities.” See 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520(c).

Section 404.1520(c) treats an impairment as severe when it significantly limits basic work activities and not severe when its effect is only slight and minimally interferes with the ability to work.

Myricks v. Social Security Administration, Commissioner · filed 2023-07-31(c)

At Step 2 of the 5-step process, the ALJ found that Myricks suffered from the severe impairments of insulin dependent diabetes mellitus with gastroparesis and post radiation sarcoma. (R. 40–42). But the ALJ determined that several of Myricks’ other impairments, including her cervical degenerative disc disease, were non-severe. (R. 41). An impairment or combination of impairments is severe if it significantly limits a claimant’s ability to perform basic work activities. 20 CFR § 404.1520(c). An impairment or combination of impairments isn’t severe “if it is a slight abnormality which has such minimal effect on the individual that it would not be expected to interfere with the individual’s ability to work irrespective of age, education, or work experience.” Brady v. Heckler, 724 F.2d 914, 920 (11th Cir. 1984).

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

Gail C v. O'Malley · filed 2024-08-13(c)

An impairment is severe only if it “significantly limit[s]” a claimant’s physical or mental ability to do basic work activities. 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520(c).

Section 404.1520(c) makes Step 2 a threshold inquiry requiring a claimant to show a medically determinable severe impairment.

Ford · filed 2026-01-06(c)

Plaintiff’s reliance on the Step 2 findings as a basis for remand is misplaced. Step 2 is a threshold inquiry at which a claimant must demonstrate a medically determinable impairment that is severe. 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520(c). Plaintiff is correct that the ALJ cannot ignore findings from Step 2 in the RFC.

Section 404.1520 requires the ALJ to determine whether a claimant has a severe impairment or combination of impairments at step 2.

Eskew v. Astrue · filed 2011-12-02(a)(4)(ii)

Step 2 requires the ALJ to determine whether the claimant has a “severe medically determinable physical or mental impairment ... or a combination of impairments that is 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 perform basic work activities.

Chapa-Gonzalez v. Saul · filed 2021-10-05(c)

A “severe impairment” is an impairment or a combination of impairments that significantly limit(s) the claimant’s physical or mental ability to perform basic work activities. 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520(c).

A severe impairment significantly limits a claimant’s physical or mental ability to do basic work activities.

Giles v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2023-07-24(c)

Further, a determination that Plaintiff’s fibromyalgia is a severe impairment means that it significantly limits a claimant’s physical or mental ability to do basic work activities. See 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1520(c), 404.1522(a); Raduc v. Comm’r of Soc. Sec., 380 F. App’x 896, 898 (11th Cir. 2010) (“By definition, a severe impairment limits significantly a claimant’s ability to do basic work activities.”).

Section 404.1520(a)(4)(iii) and (d) require the agency at step three to decide whether a claimant’s impairments meet or equal a listed impairment and deem the claimant disabled if they do, without proceeding to analysis of residual functional capacity or other work.

THIBODEAU v. SOCIAL SECURITY ADMINISTRATION COMMISSIONER · filed 2021-07-20(a)(4)(iii), (d)

At Step 3 of the sequential evaluation process, the Commissioner considers whether a claimant’s impairments meet or equal the criteria set forth in the “listings” found in appendix 1 of the disability regulations. 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1520(a)(4)(iii); 416.920(a)(4)(iii). If so, the claimant is deemed disabled without any further analysis of the claimant’s residual functional capacity to perform past relevant work or other work in the national economy. Id., §§ 404.1520(d); 416.920(d); ... Plaintiff does not make the required showing that his impairment meets or medically equals all the elements of any of the subsections of Listing 1.04. There is no evidence of spinal arachnoiditis (subsection B) and insufficient evidence of lumbar spinal stenosis resulting in the inability to ambulate effectively (subsection C). ... The ALJ’s conclusion that Plaintiff’s impairments did not meet or equal a listing is supportable.

Section 404.1520(a)(4)(iii) directs the Step Three inquiry to whether a claimant’s impairment meets or medically equals a listed impairment; satisfying a listing establishes disability.

Brown v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2021-07-30(a)(4)(iii)

At Step Three, the ALJ considers whether a claimant’s impairment meets or medically equals the criteria of any impairment listed in Appendix 1 to Subpart P of the SSDI regulations. 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520 (a)(4)(iii). If the ALJ determines a claimant meets or medically equals a listed impairment, the claimant is disabled. Id.

Section 404.1520 requires the ALJ to follow the sequential disability evaluation and, at step three, determine whether the claimant's impairments meet or medically equal a listed impairment.

Gatejen v. Saul · filed 2022-03-28(a)(4)(iii), (d)

As relevant here, where a claimant is found to have at least one severe impairment at step two of the sequential process, see 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520(a)(4)(ii), step three requires the ALJ to evaluate whether a claimant’s impairments meet or medically equal any of the impairments listed in 20 C.F.R., Part 404, Subpart P, Appendix 1. ... By failing to provide any discussion of whether Petitioner’s migraine headaches met or equaled a listing after finding migraines were a severe impairment, the ALJ committed legal error.

Section 404.1520 requires the ALJ at step three to determine whether the claimant’s impairments meet or equal a listed impairment before proceeding to later steps.

Travis · filed 2025-12-09(a)(4)

At Step 3 of this sequential analysis, the ALJ is required to determine whether a claimant’s impairments or combination of impairments are so severe that they are disabling, entitling the claimant to benefits.

At Step Three, the ALJ must consider whether a claimant’s fibromyalgia medically equals a listed impairment and explain that consideration sufficiently for judicial review.

Lowe · filed 2025-11-17(a)(4)(iii)

SSR 12-2p requires that the ALJ consider the medical severity of a claimant’s fibromyalgia to determine whether it medically equals a listed impairment, and articulate that consideration for subsequent review. See also 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520(a)(4)(iii); Reynolds, 424 F. App’x at 416. This, alone, requires remand.

Section 404.1520(c) requires the ALJ to determine whether an impairment significantly limits basic work abilities, while § 404.1520(f) ends the sequential evaluation without a disability finding if the claimant can perform past relevant work.

Alexander v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2021-09-21(c), (f)

At step two of the sequential evaluation, the ALJ must determine if the claimant suffers from any medically determinable impairments that are “severe.” 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1520(a)(4)(ii), 416.920(a)(4)(ii). An impairment is not considered to be “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(c), 416.920(c); Social Security Ruling (“SSR”) 96-3p, 1996 WL 374181, at *1. ... The ALJ’s finding that Plaintiff’s shoulder impairment had no more than a minimal effect on Plaintiff’s ability to work is not supported by substantial evidence. ... Accordingly, the ALJ erred in evaluating Plaintiff’s shoulder impairment at step two. ... At step four in the evaluation process, the ALJ must determine whether or not a claimant’s impairment(s) prevents the claimant from performing past relevant work. See 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1520(f), 416.920(f). If the ALJ finds that the claimant can perform past relevant work, the claimant is not disabled for social security purposes and the evaluation process ends. Id. ... For the reasons discussed above, the ALJ’s finding that Plaintiff could perform her past relevant work is not supported by substantial evidence.

At step two, if an ALJ finds that a claimant has no severe impairment, the sequential evaluation ends and the ALJ need not proceed to later steps.

Hall v. Social Security Administration · filed 2023-03-31(a)(4)

Once an ALJ finds that a claimant does not suffer from a severe impairment at step two, he does not proceed to the subsequent steps. 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520(a)(4). Once the ALJ found in this case that Claimant had no severe impairments during the short relevant time period, he had no obligation to proceed further.

At steps four and five, the regulation requires the ALJ to determine whether a claimant can perform past relevant work and, if not, other work.

Gregory v. Commissioner, Social Security Administration · filed 2023-07-14(a)(4)(iv)-(v)

At steps four and five of the sequential process, the ALJ must determine whether the claimant has the RFC to perform his past relevant work and, if not, any other work. 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520(a)(4)(iv)-(v).

Section 404.1520(a)(3) treats whether a claimant is unable to work as an issue reserved to the Commissioner, so the ALJ need not consider that ultimate conclusion as a medical opinion.

Jones v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2021-09-24(a)(3)

The current regulations also provide that issues reserved to the Commissioner—such as the inability to work—and conclusions of other agencies—like the VA—are neither considered nor discussed. 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1520(a)(3), 404.1520b(c). Thus, Jones’s points of error lack merit. Neither Jindrich nor Gehle supplied “opinions.” And any ultimate conclusion that Jones was unable to work as well as any disability conclusion by the VA need not be considered.

Section 404.1520(c)(3) places responsibility for deciding whether a claimant is disabled with the Commissioner, rather than the claimant’s attending physicians.

Conder v. Saul · filed 2021-12-03(c)(3)

These opinions do not control the ALJ’s decision; responsibility for deciding the disability issue rests with the Commissioner. 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520(c)(3). See Stormo v. Barnhart, 377 F.3d 801 (8th Cir. 2004) (ALJ does not need to follow attending physicians’ disability determinations because they constitute legal conclusions, not medical data).

Section 404.1520 requires an ALJ to evaluate whether a claimant’s impairments meet or medically equal a listed impairment, and the claimant is disabled at that step if they do.

Faulkner v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2021-10-14(a)(4)(iii), (d)

In determining whether a claimant is disabled, an ALJ must consider whether the claimant’s impairments meet Social Security Listing requirements. 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1520(a)(4)(iii), 416.920(a)(4)(iii). If the impairment is listed or is medically equivalent to a listed impairment, the claimant is found disabled and benefits are awarded. 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520(d).

Section 404.1520(a)(4)(iii) requires the Commissioner to determine at step three whether a claimant’s impairments meet or equal a listed impairment.

Hall v. Kijakazi · filed 2022-02-15(a)(4)(iii)

At step three, the ALJ must determine if a claimant’s impairments meet or equal a listed impairment. 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520(a)(4)(iii). ... Here, the ALJ found that Plaintiff’s impairments and combinations of impairments did not meet or equal any listings, including Listing 11.02. Tr. 21. Plaintiff argues the ALJ provided “no analysis of the record evidence.” ECF No. 18 at 14. However, the ALJ’s decision was not devoid of analysis; he found that the medical record does not document the frequency of seizures required to meet the Listing. Tr. 21. Plaintiff has failed to cite evidence of record substantiating that Plaintiff experiences seizures at the frequency level required for Listing 11.02. ... Plaintiff has not met his burden in demonstrating his impairment meets or equals a listing. Plaintiff is not entitled to remand on these grounds.

At step three, § 404.1520(a)(4)(iii) directs the ALJ to determine whether a claimant’s impairment meets or medically equals an Appendix 1 listing, and § 404.1520(d) treats a claimant who meets a listing as disabled.

Moore v. Saul · filed 2022-02-23(a)(4)(iii), (d)

The listings in Appendix 1 operate as a presumption of disability because they define impairments so significant that they would prevent a person, regardless of her age, education, or work experience, from performing any substantial gainful activity. Sullivan v. Zebley, 493 U.S. 521, 532 (1990); 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1520(a)(4)(iii), (d), 416.920(a)(4)(iii), (d). To establish that she has an impairment that meets a listing, a claimant must prove that her impairment satisfies all of the specified medical criteria associated with that particular listing. Id. at 530; 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1525(c)(3), 416.925(c)(3).

Section 404.1520(a)(4)(iii) requires an ALJ to determine at step three whether severe impairments meet or medically equal a listed impairment; if they do, the claimant is disabled.

Nail v. Kijakazi · filed 2022-03-21(a)(4)(iii), (d)

At Step 3 of the sequential evaluation, the ALJ must evaluate whether the claimant’s severe impairments meet or equal a listing in appendix 1. 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520(a)(iii). If the claimant’s impairments meet or equal a listing, the ALJ will find that the claimant is disabled. Id.; McCoy v. Astrue, 648 F.3d 605, 611 (8th Cir. 2011). ... As explained above, the ALJ’s subsequent discussion of Nail’s headaches demonstrates that the ALJ did not consider all of the evidence relating to Nail’s continuing headaches and did not consider the effects of Nail’s continuing headaches on his functional abilities. And other evidence, including Dr. Snyder’s account of Nail’s treatment history and diagnoses of vestibular migraine and chronic migraine, evince a frequency of headaches required by listing 11.02 paragraphs B and D. Therefore, his conclusion regarding the frequency and effects of Nail’s headaches is not supported by substantial evidence on the record as a whole.

Section 404.1520(d) requires the ALJ to determine at Step Three whether a claimant’s impairments meet or medically equal a listed impairment, with a finding that they do resulting in disability.

Reinhart v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2022-06-03(d)

At step three, the ALJ must decide whether claimant meets or medically equals any of the impairments listed in 20 C.F.R. Part 404, Subpart P, Appendix 1. 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520(d); Tackett v. Apfel, 180 F.3d 1094, 1098 (9th Cir. 1999). If the claimant meets or medically equals any of the listed impairments, the claimant is deemed disabled without consideration of the claimant’s age, education, and work experience. 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520(d). ... Based on the foregoing, the ALJ did not err in finding that plaintiff did not meet or equal the Paragraph B criteria for listings 12.04 and 12.06.

Section 404.1520(a)(4)(iii) and (d) require the Commissioner to determine at step three whether a claimant’s impairments meet or equal a listed impairment and to find the claimant disabled without further vocational analysis if they do.

BRUCE v. SOCIAL SECURITY ADMINISTRATION COMMISSIONER · filed 2023-02-22(a)(4)(iii), (d)

At step 3 of the sequential evaluation process, the Commissioner considers whether a claimant’s impairments meet or equal the criteria set forth in the “listings” found in appendix 1 of the disability regulations. ... If so, the claimant is deemed disabled without any further analysis of the claimant’s residual functional capacity to perform past relevant work or other work in the national economy.

Section 404.1520(d) provides that a claimant is conclusively disabled when an impairment meets or medically equals a listed impairment.

Lunsford v. Kijakazi · filed 2023-04-19(d)

The Ninth Circuit has recognized that “[c]onditions contained in the Listing of Impairments are considered so severe that they are irrebuttably presumed disabling, without any specific finding as to the claimant’s ability to perform his past relevant work or any other jobs.” Lester v. Chater, 81 F.3d 821, 828 (9th Cir. 1995) (internal quotation marks omitted); 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520(d). Accordingly, “[c]laimants are conclusively disabled if their condition either meets or equals a listed impairment.” Id.; 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520(d).

Section 404.1520 requires the claimant to show at step three that an impairment meets or medically equals a listed impairment; meeting all listing criteria results in disability, while otherwise the evaluation proceeds to step four.

Collins v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2023-04-19(a)(4)(iii), (d)-(e)

At step three of the sequential evaluation process, the claimant carries the burden to show he has an impairment or combination of impairments that meets or medically equals the criteria of an impairment listed in 20 C.F.R. Pt. 404, Subpt. P, App. 1. See Foster v. Halter, 279 F.3d 348, 354 (6th Cir. 2001); 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520(a)(4)(iii). If a claimant meets all of the criteria of a listed impairment, he is disabled; otherwise, the evaluation proceeds to step four. 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520(d)-(e); see also Rabbers, 582 F.3d at 653 (“A claimant must satisfy all of the criteria to meet the listing.”).

Section 404.1520(a)(4)(iii) and (d) require an ALJ to determine at step three whether a claimant's impairment meets or equals a listed impairment, resulting in disability if it does.

Gigliotti v. Kijakazi · filed 2023-07-26(a)(4)(iii), (d)

At step three, the ALJ must determine whether the individual’s severe impairment meets or equals the criteria of any impairment listed in Appendix 1 of the regulations (the “listings”). 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1520(a)(4)(iii), (d), 416.920(a)(4)(iii), (d); see 20 C.F.R. § 404 subpt. P, app. 1. If an individual’s impairment, or combination of impairments, matches the requirements of the relevant listing, then the individual is disabled. Id. §§ 404.1520(d), 416.920(d).

Section 404.1520(a)(4)(iii) requires a claimant seeking a step-three finding of disability to establish that an impairment has satisfied, or can be expected to satisfy, a listing’s criteria for at least twelve months.

Watkins v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2023-09-26(a)(4)(iii)

A finding of disability at step three requires that a claimant establish that she has an impairment that has satisfied, or can be expected to satisfy, a listing’s criteria for at least twelve months. 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520(a)(4)(iii).

At step three, the regulation directs an ALJ to award benefits when a claimant's impairment or combination of impairments meets a listed impairment, without considering age, education, or work experience.

Lameman v. Commissioner of Social Security Administration · filed 2023-09-29(a)(4)(iii)

Where a claimant proves that they have an impairment, or combination of impairments specifically listed in this section, the ALJ should award them benefits without considering age, education or work experience. See 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520(a)(4)(iii).

Section 404.1520 requires an ALJ to evaluate whether a claimant’s impairments meet or medically equal a listed impairment, and the claimant is disabled at that step if they do.

Burdine v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2023-10-30(a)(4)(iii), (d)

In determining whether a claimant is disabled, an ALJ must consider whether the claimant’s impairments meet Social Security Listing requirements. 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1520(a)(4)(iii), 416.920(a)(4)(iii). If the impairment is listed or is medically equivalent to a listed impairment, the claimant is found disabled and benefits are awarded. 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520(d).

Section 404.1520(d) directs an ALJ to find a claimant disabled at step three when the claimant’s impairment meets or equals a listed impairment, and the claimant bears the burden of proving that condition.

Garcia-Diaz v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2024-05-31(d)

However, although the significant number of years that elapsed is a source of pause and concern, ultimately at step three, Plaintiff bears the burden of proving that her impairment or combination of impairments meets or equals a listing in 20 C.F.R. Part 404, Subpart P, Appendix 1. See 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520(d); Dudley v. Sec’y of Health & Human Servs., 816 F.2d 792, 793 (1st Cir. 1987) (“[t]he burden to demonstrate the existence of such a [listed] impairment rests with the [plaintiff].”). Plaintiff fails to cite evidence indicating that she warranted anything higher than a moderate limitation in any of the Paragraph B criteria. Accordingly, Plaintiff’s challenges to the ALJ’s use of the special technique at step three cannot prosper.

Section 404.1520(a)(4)(iii) requires an ALJ at step three to determine whether a claimant's impairment meets or medically equals a listed impairment and satisfies the duration requirement.

Harmon v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2024-08-14(a)(4)(iii)

At Step Three of the sequential evaluation process, the ALJ must evaluate whether the claimant has “an impairment(s) that meets or equals one of [the] listings in appendix 1” and “meets the duration requirement[.]” 20 C.F.R. § 4040.1520(a)(4)(iii).

Section 404.1520 requires an ALJ at step three to determine whether a claimant’s impairment meets or medically equals a listed impairment, and finding that it does results in presumptive disability.

Sabine v. O'Malley · filed 2024-08-28(a)(4)(iii), (d)

If an ALJ determines that a claimant meets or equals the severity of a listed impairment, the claimant is presumptively disabled. 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520(d); Cathy D.H. v. O’Malley, No. 21 C 5992, 2024 WL 3177431, at *2 (N.D. Ill. June 26, 2024). ... An impairment that satisfies a listing renders a claimant disabled. 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520(a)(4)(iii). “The Listings involve cases where the impairment is so severe that there is no need to evaluate the limits of what a claimant can actually do; thus, if a claimant satisfies the requirements of a Listing, she is presumptively disabled and no further consideration is required.”

Section 404.1520(a)(4)(iii) and (d) require the ALJ at step three to determine whether the claimant’s impairments meet or equal a listed impairment, finding the claimant disabled if they do.

(SS) Johnson v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2025-03-21(a)(4)(iii), (d)

At step three of the sequential evaluation, a finding of disability is compelled where the claimant’s impairment or combination of impairments meets or equals an impairment listed in Appendix 1 to Subpart P of the regulations. 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1520(a)(4)(iii), (d). ... Accordingly, the ALJ had no basis for a finding that plaintiff met or equaled Listing 11.02. There was no error at step three.

At step three, Section 404.1520(a)(4)(iii) requires the Commissioner to determine whether a claimant’s impairments meet or medically equal a listed impairment.

Boyer v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2025-04-16(a)(4)(iii)

At step three of the disability evaluation process, the Commissioner must consider whether a claimant’s impairments meet or medically equal any of the relevant listing requirements of 20 C.F.R. Part 404, Subpart P, App. 1, 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1520(a)(4)(iii). ... Given the ALJ’s non-equivalency finding, it is unclear why he mentioned lack of evidence of seizures. In any event, even if the ALJ erred by applying the incorrect standard, the evidentiary record does not satisfy the requirements of SSR 19-4p because it lacks a detailed description of a typical headache event from an acceptable medical source who has observed the event. ... Given this lack of evidence from a medical provider, the ALJ properly determined that the record failed to support medical equivalence under listing 11.02(B).

At step three, § 404.1520(a)(4)(iii) requires a listed impairment to have lasted or be expected to last continuously for at least 12 months.

Foster v. O'Malley · filed 2025-06-16(a)(4)(iii)

It is true that, to be found disabled under step three, a claimant must have had an impairment in the Listing of Impairments “for a continuous period of at least 12 months.” 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1509, 404.1520(a)(4)(iii). But the impairment in Listing 5.08 is “[w]eight loss due to any digestive disorder,” and the ALJ made no finding that Plaintiff was not experiencing weight loss due to a digestive disorder for at least 12 months.

Section 404.1520’s five-step evaluation requires an ALJ assessing alleged mental impairments to apply a special technique at steps two and three; findings from that technique do not replace an RFC assessment.

Scott v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2020-10-22

The ALJ discussed the specific limitations from the RFC but only in the context of the listings and severity as part of the psychiatric review technique at step three of the sequential evaluation. (Tr. 18). This was improper. When there are mental impairments alleged, in addition to the typical five-step analysis outlined in 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520, the ALJ must apply a “special technique” at the second and third steps to evaluate alleged mental impairments. See Kohler v. Astrue, 546 F.3d 260, 265 (2d Cir.2008). The regulations are clear that the limitations identified in the "paragraph B" and "paragraph C" criteria are not an RFC assessment but are used to rate the severity of mental impairments at steps 2 and 3 of the sequential evaluation process.

Section 404.1520(a)(4)(ii) and (c) requires an ALJ at step two to determine whether the claimant has a severe impairment that significantly limits the ability to perform basic work activities.

Bradshaw v. Saul · filed 2021-10-19(a)(4)(ii), (c)

At step two of the five-step sequential evaluation for disability claims, the ALJ must determine whether the claimant has one or more severe impairments that significantly limit a claimant’s ability to perform basic work activities. 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1520(a)(4)(ii) and (c); 416.920(a)(4)(ii) and (c).

Section 404.1520(a)(4)(ii) requires an ALJ to consider whether a claimant has a severe impairment or combination of impairments.

Farr v. Saul · filed 2021-11-18(a)(4)(ii)

In evaluating a disability claim, the ALJ is required to consider whether a claimant suffers from a “severe” impairment or combination of impairments. 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520(a)(4)(ii).

At step two, an impairment is severe if it significantly limits a claimant’s physical or mental ability to perform basic work activities, and it is non-severe only when it has a minimal effect on the ability to work.

Davidson v. Commissioner of the Social Security Administration · filed 2022-05-26(c)

At step two, the burden is on the claimant to establish a severe impairment. ... Severe impairments include “any 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(c) and 416.20(c). An impairment is not severe “only if it is a slight abnormality having such minimal effect on the individual that it would not be expected to interfere with the individual’s ability to work, irrespective of age, education, or work experience.” ... If the ALJ applies the incorrect legal standard when assessing severe and non-severe impairments, reversal is generally required. Id. at 1106.

At step two, § 404.1520 requires the ALJ to determine whether an impairment is severe based on whether it significantly limits the claimant's ability to do basic work activities.

THOMPSON v. KIJAKAZI · filed 2022-05-27(a)(4)(ii), (c)

Step two of the disability determination requires the ALJ to determine whether the claimant has any medically determinable impairments based on objective medical evidence. 42 U.S.C. § 423(d); 20 CFR § 404.1520(a)(4)(ii); 20 CFR § 404.1521. The ALJ must then categorize each impairment as "severe" or "non-severe," which depends on whether the impairment, either individually or in combination with other impairments, "significantly limits [the claimant's] physical or mental ability to do basic work activities." 20 CFR § 404.1520(c); 20 CFR § 404.1522. ... Ultimately, there is no indication that ALJ Brown fulfilled her duty to consider all of the relevant evidence at step two because she failed to articulate any analysis of evidence related to Claimant's migraines.

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

Ratanavong v. Social Security Administration · filed 2022-06-08(c)

At step two of the sequential evaluation process, the ALJ must determine whether the claimant has a medically determinable impairment or 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. Id.; 20 CFR §§ 404.1521(a), 416.920(c), 416.921(a).

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

Jackson v. Commissioner Social Security Administration · filed 2022-06-27(a)(4)(ii)

At step two, the ALJ determines if the claimant has a medically “severe” impairment or combination of impairments that lasted, or is expected to last, for a continuous period of at least 12 months. 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.923, 404.1509, 404.1520(a)(4)(ii). ... In sum, plaintiff failed to meet her burden at step two that her DVT and blood clots were “severe” impairments that significantly limited her physical or mental ability to do basic work activities. 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520(1)(5)(c).

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

Cottrell v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2022-09-08(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 an ALJ to determine whether a claimant has a severe impairment that limits the claimant's ability to do physical or mental work-related activities.

Collins v. Commissioner of the Social Security Administration · filed 2023-02-27(c)

The regulations state that an ALJ "'must determine whether the claimant has a "severe" impairment, i.e., an impairment that limits [her] ability to do physical or mental work-related activities.'" Bushey v. Berryhill, 739 Fed. Appx. 668, 670 (2d Cir. 2018) (quoting Greek v. Colvin, 802 F.3d 370, 374 n.2 (2d Cir. 2015)); see also 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1520(c), 404.1521.

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

Jackson v. Social Security Administration · filed 2023-06-05(c)

A “severe” impairment is one that significantly limits a claimant’s physical or mental ability to do basic work activities. ... The medical evidence clearly shows Plaintiff's back and neck issues significantly limit her ability to perform basic work activities. Therefore, this matter should be remanded for further development of the record — namely evaluating Plaintiff's back and neck impairments beyond Step 2 of the sequential analysis.

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.

Wheeler v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2023-08-02(c)

At Step Two of the five-step sequential evaluation process, the ALJ determines whether a claimant’s impairments are severe and whether they meet the twelve-month durational requirement. 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520(a). 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).

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

Lingenfelter v. Commissioner of the Social Security Administration · filed 2023-11-09(c)

A severe impairment is defined by the regulations 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).

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

Sanchez v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2023-12-19(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.

Section 404.1520(c) requires an ALJ to determine at step two whether a claimant has a severe impairment, and the step-two screen is met when an impairment has more than a minimal effect on basic work activities.

Yingst v. Kijakazi · filed 2024-12-06(c)

At step-two of the sequential analysis, the ALJ determines whether a claimant has a medically severe impairment or combination of impairments. Bowen v. Yuckert, 482 U.S. 137, 140-41, 107 S.Ct. 2287, 96 L.Ed.2d 119 (1987). Step 2 of this sequential analysis is often the first substantive benchmark an ALJ must address and is governed by familiar legal standards: ... Given the “de minimus” nature of the claimant's burden at Step 2, acknowledging that “[a]ny doubt as to whether this showing has been made is to be resolved in favor of the applicant,” and accepting that the claimant's burden at step two is “not an exacting one,” McCrea, 370 F.3d at 360, we conclude that the ALJ erred in not considering Yingst’s mental impairments to be severe at Step 2.

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

Matson v. Colvin · filed 2024-12-16(c)

The regulations, 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1520(c), 416.920(c), provide that an impairment is severe if it significantly limits one’s ability to perform basic work activities. ... Based on the foregoing, the ALJ’s determination that Plaintiff’s kidney stone and migraine headache impairments were not severe at step two of the sequential evaluation process is supported by substantial evidence.

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

Rinn v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2025-02-18(c)

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) (stating that an impairment is not severe at step two if it does not significantly limit a claimant’s ability to do basic work activities).

Section 404.1520(c) defines a severe impairment as an impairment or combination of impairments that significantly limits a claimant’s physical or mental ability to do basic work activities.

Bray v. Social Security, Commissioner of · filed 2025-02-25(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).

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.

Forrer v. Commissioner Social Security Administration · filed 2025-04-21(c)

An impairment 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).

Section 404.1520(c) treats an impairment as not severe only under a de minimis standard when it has a minimal effect on the claimant's ability to work.

Johnson v. Secretary of Health & Human Services · filed 1985-07-24(c)

The severity regulation is a rule of administrative convenience designed to enable the Secretary to “realize the efficiency gains promised by 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520(c) while protecting claimants from a statutorily unwarranted increase in the burden of making a prima facie case of disability.” ... This Court is of the opinion that a de minimis application of the severity regulation is a preferable rule.

Section 404.1520(c) excludes age, education, and work experience from consideration when deciding whether an impairment is severe.

Anderson v. Schweiker · filed 1983-03-08(c)

I cannot conclude, after my review, that section 404.1520(c) is inconsistent with the Social Security Act. See McCoy v. Schweiker, supra, at 1144-45. I therefore hold that it is valid.

Section 404.1520 requires an ALJ to identify a claimant’s severe impairment and explain the basis for that determination.

Lane-Rauth v. Barnhart · filed 2006-06-20(a)(4)(ii)

The court need only look to the plaintiffs initial application to determine her arguments for claiming disability and, therefore, what the ALJ considered her “severe impairment.” ... 5 U.S.C. § 557(c)(3)(A); 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520.

Section 404.1520 requires the ALJ to consider the claimant’s impairments in combination.

Brown v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2022-05-06

An ALJ must consider the combination of impairments. 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1520, 416.920.

Subsection (c) directs the ALJ to determine whether an impairment or a combination of impairments is severe.

Davis v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2014-03-28(c)

Contrary to Plaintiffs contentions regarding the impairments, the ALJ’s finding that the combination of Plaintiffs impairments was severe is in accord with the regulations which direct the ALJ to determine whether the Plaintiff has an impairment that is “severe” or a combination of impairments that is “severe.” 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1520(c); 416.920(c).

Section 404.1520(d) requires the ALJ to determine at Step 3 whether a claimant’s severe impairment meets or medically equals a listed impairment.

Broussard v. Saul · filed 2022-06-01(d)

At Step 3 of the sequential analysis, the ALJ must determine whether a claimant’s severe impairment meets or medically equals one of the listings found in the regulation known as Appendix 1. See 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1520(d), 416.920(d).

At step three, the regulation requires the ALJ to determine whether the claimant's impairment meets or medically equals a listed impairment.

Murriel L. Hays v. Kijakazi · filed 2022-12-28(a)(4)(iii)

At step three, the ALJ considers the medical severity of a claimant’s impairments to determine whether the impairments meet or equal the criteria of any of the impairments listed in the Listings of Impairments, 20 C.F.R. Part 404, Subpart P, Appendix 1 (“Listings”). 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1520(a)(4)(iii), 404.1525; Tackett v. Apfel, 180 F.3d 1094, 1099 (9th Cir. 1999). ... The Court finds that substantial evidence supports the ALJ’s determination at step three that Plaintiff’s impairments, or combination of impairments, do not meet or medically equal the severity of one of the Listings.

At step three, an ALJ must determine whether a claimant's impairments meet or equal a listed impairment by comparing each listing criterion with the medical evidence.

Kaufman v. Kijakazi · filed 2023-08-28(a)(4)

The ALJ’s step three evaluation of the medical severity of Plaintiff’s impairments under Listing 14.09 is not supported by substantial evidence. 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1520(a)(4), 404.1525, and 404.1526 outline how an ALJ determines whether a claimant’s medical impairments “meet” or “equal” an impairment listed in the SSA regulations. To “meet” an impairment listed in the regulations, the claimant must demonstrate that he or she satisfies “all of the criteria of that listing.” Id. § 404.1525(c)(3). But even if a claimant’s impairments do not meet a listed impairment, the impairment may still medically “equal” the criteria of a listing if it is “at least equal in severity and duration to the criteria of any listed impairment.” Id. §404.1526(a); see also Halperin v. Saul, 855 F. App’x 114, 116 (4th Cir. 2021) (describing how a claimant may “meet” or “equal” an impairment listed in the SSA regulations). An ALJ’s conclusion as to whether a claimant has met or equaled a listed impairment is upheld if the ALJ “compared each of the listed criteria to the evidence of [the plaintiff’s] symptoms.”

At step three, the Commissioner must determine whether the claimant's impairment or combination of impairments meets or medically equals a listing in Appendix 1.

Brown v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2023-12-21(a)(4)(iii)

At step three of the five-step sequential analysis, the ALJ considers whether the claimant “[has] an impairment(s) that meets or equals one of the listings in appendix 1 of this subpart[.]” 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520(a)(4)(iii).

At step three, § 404.1520(d) requires an ALJ to determine whether the claimant’s impairment or combination of impairments meets or medically equals a listed impairment for presumptive disability.

Chambers v. O'Malley · filed 2025-01-24(d)

A claimant is eligible for benefits if she has an impairment that meets or equals an impairment found in the listing of impairments. 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520(d). ... Therefore, at step three of the sequential evaluation process, an ALJ must determine whether the claimant’s impairment or combination of impairments is of a severity to meet or medically equal the criteria of an impairment listed in 20 C.F.R. Part 404, Subpart P, Appendix 1.

Section 404.1520 requires an ALJ to assess impairment severity at step two and determine residual functional capacity at step four by considering all relevant medical and other evidence.

Fair v. Commissioner of the Social Security Administration · filed 2022-06-02(a)(4)(ii), (e)

At step two, the ALJ considers the severity of a claimant’s impairments. 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520(a)(4)(ii). ... When an ALJ determines that one or more of a claimant’s impairments are severe, the ALJ must proceed to consider the “limitations and restrictions imposed by all of an individual’s impairments, even those that are not severe.” ... Thus, “any perceived failure to find additional severe impairments at step two [does] not constitute reversible error” as long as the ALJ considered all of the claimant’s impairments in the remaining steps. ... At Step Four, the ALJ must determine a claimant’s RFC by considering all relevant medical and other evidence. 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520(e).

Section 404.1520(c) defines a severe impairment as one that significantly limits basic work activities, and § 404.1520(e) requires consideration of all severe and non-severe impairments when determining residual functional capacity.

BEAL v. KIJAKAZI · filed 2022-09-30(c), (e)

The Commissioner identified the regulation that defines severe impairment and cited to case law explaining when an impairment is not severe. (See 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520(c) (severe impairment is one that "significantly limits your physical or mental ability to do basic work activities").) Then, the Commissioner quoted the case law noted above explaining that step two is merely a threshold requirement in the evaluation process. The Commissioner correctly articulated the five-step sequential evaluation process for determining whether an individual is disabled and explained that so long as a claimant has a severe impairment or combination of impairments, the ALJ's analysis proceeds to the next step. At step four, the ALJ must consider all of a claimant's impairments, both severe and non-severe, and determine the claimant's residual functional capacity. 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520(e). The ALJ did that here.

Section 404.1520(a)(4)(iv) requires an ALJ to determine a claimant's residual functional capacity before proceeding to Step Four of the disability evaluation.

Burkhart v. Social Security Administration Commissioner · filed 2023-06-20(a)(4)(iv)

Prior to Step Four of the sequential analysis in a disability determination, the ALJ is required to determine a claimant's RFC. See 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520(a)(4)(iv).

Section 404.1520(a)(4)(iv) requires an ALJ to determine a claimant's residual functional capacity before proceeding to step four of the disability evaluation.

Davis v. Social Security Administration Commissioner · filed 2023-10-30(a)(4)(iv)

Prior to Step Four of the sequential analysis in a disability determination, the ALJ is required to determine a claimant's RFC.