20 C.F.R. § 404.1520

The sequential disability evaluation ends when the Commissioner can determine at a step whether the claimant is disabled.

Edwards v. Commissioner of Social Security Administration · filed 2021-01-20(a)(4)

If a decision regarding disability may be made at any step, no further inquiry is necessary.

Section 404.1520 requires disability claims to be evaluated through a five step process, including consideration of residual functional capacity at the fifth step.

Kier v. Louis W. Sullivan, M.D., Secretary of Health and Human Services · filed 1989-10-23(f)

The basic sequential procedure for determining disability under the Act is set forth in 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520. Under the fifth step of that procedure, an adjudicator determines whether a claimant, in light of her residual functional capacity, age, education, and work experience, has the capacity to perform “alternative occupations in the national economy.” ... The very exclusion of these factors mentioned in step five of the sequential evaluation process strongly suggests that the other factor listed in step five — residual functional capacity — is to be considered.

Section 404.1520 requires disability claims to be evaluated through five steps, including whether the claimant can perform work in the national economy.

JEFFCOAT v. SECRETARY OF HHS · filed 1995-12-07

The Secretary’s regulations require a five-step sequential evaluation process for disability determinations. 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520 (1986). First: Is the plaintiff currently engaging in substantial gainful activity? (If so, a finding of nondisability is required to be made and the inquiry ends.) Second: Does the plaintiff have a severe impairment or combination of impairments? (If not, a finding of nondisability is required and the inquiry ends.) Third: Does the severe impairment meet or equal those in the Listing of Impairments, 20 C.F.R. Subpart P, Appendix 1 (1986)? (If so, disability is presumed and benefits are awarded.) Fourth: Does the impairment prevent the performance of the plaintiffs regular previous employment? (If it does, then a prima facie case of disability is established and the burden of going forward with the evidence shifts to the Secretary.) Chaparro v. Bowen, 815 F.2d 1008, 1010 (5th Cir.1987). Fifth: Is there work in the national economy which the plaintiff can perform? This final evaluation step involves the determination of whether the plaintiffs impairment, after considering his age, education, and other work experience, prevents the him from performing other work which exists in the national economy. 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520. (If the Secretary shows that the plaintiff can perform alternative employment, the burden then shifts back to the claimant to show he or she cannot perform the alternative labor. Id.; Taylor v. Bowen, 782 F.2d 1294, 1298 (5th Cir.1986)).

Section 404.1520(a) makes a proper disability or nondisability finding at a step conclusive against later steps, but it does not prohibit an ALJ from making alternative step findings.

Larry MURRELL, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Donna SHALALA, Secretary, Health and Human Services, Defendant-Appellee · filed 1994-12-29(a)

Both common sense and the Secretary’s own common practice indicate this regulation means only that, due to the way the sequential analysis is structured, a proper finding of disability (at step three) or nondisability (at steps two, four, or five) is conclusive and, thus, cannot be overturned by consideration of a subsequent step. The regulation does not address the propriety of alternative dispositions such as those rendered here, which clearly adhere to this principle of conclusiveness (i.e., the integrity of a step-four finding is not compromised in any way by the recognition that step five, if it were reached, would dictate the same [or a different] result).

Section 404.1520 requires the sequential evaluation to assess past work at step four without vocational factors and to reserve vocational factors such as education for step five.

Carlos GARCIA, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. SECRETARY OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES, Defendant-Appellee · filed 1995-02-07(e), (f)(1)

The sequential analysis contained in 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1520 and 416.920 preserves this allocation: The determination of disability is predominantly a medical one, yet the Secretary assigns a role for vocational factors in the fifth and final stage.

Section 404.1520 requires disability determinations to proceed through a five-step sequential evaluation process.

Eaves v. Secretary of Health and Human Services · filed 1995-02-16

The Secretary’s regulations require a five-step sequential evaluation process for disability determinations.

Section 404.1520 requires disability determinations to use a five-step sequential evaluation process.

Walhood v. Secretary of Health & Human Services · filed 1995-02-16

The Secretary’s regulations require a five-step sequential evaluation process for disability determinations.

Section 404.1520 requires disability claims to be evaluated sequentially in five steps, with the inquiry ending when a claimant is found not disabled, including at step two for lack of a severe impairment.

Chevalier v. Shalala · filed 1994-12-05

A five step process is to be employed to determine whether the claimant is disabled. 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1520, 416.920. If it is determined at any step that the claimant is not disabled, then further review is not necessary. ... You must have a severe impairment. If you do not have any impairment or combination of impairments which significantly limits your physical or mental ability to do basic work activities, we will find that you do not have a severe impairment and are, therefore, not disabled. We will not consider your age, education, and work experience.

Section 404.1520 requires disability determinations to follow a five-step sequential evaluation process.

Richard v. Secretary of HHS · filed 1995-07-31

The Secretary’s regulations require a five-step sequential evaluation process for disability determinations.

Section 404.1520 establishes a five-step sequential evaluation process for determining disability, and the review ends when the agency makes a disability finding.

Eason v. Chater · filed 1996-01-12(a)

The Secretary has implemented a five-part sequential evaluation process for determining disability. See 20 CFR §§ 404.1520(a)-(f), 416.920; see also Williams v. Bowen, 844 F.2d 748, 750-52 (10th Cir.1988). Briefly, the five steps are (1) whether the claimant is presently working; (2) whether the claimant suffers from a severe impairment; (3) whether the impairment meets or equals an impairment listed in Appendix 1 of the relevant regulation; (4) whether the impairment pre-eludes the claimant from continuing his past relevant work;- and (5) whether the impairment prevents the claimant from doing any kind of work. Trimiar, 966 F.2d at 1329. The review process ends at any point in the process when the Secretary makes a finding as to disability. ... Eason contends the Secretary skipped steps two and three. Eason’s contention is well-taken. The ALJ set forth the abilities required by a heavy equipment operator and then surmised without explanation that a seizure disorder would not affect Eason’s ability to be a heavy equipment mechanic. On remand, the ALJ should complete the last two steps of the analysis.

Section 404.1520 requires an ALJ to evaluate disability claims through five sequential inquiries, including whether the claimant can perform other work.

Reil v. HHS · filed 1996-03-11

In finding Reil not disabled within the meaning of the Act, the ALJ utilized the mandatory five-step sequential evaluation process set forth in 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1520, 416.920 (1995). ... Step 5 of the evaluation process requires the ALJ to determine whether, despite the claimant's impairment, she retains the RFC to perform work existing in the national economy. Id.

Section 404.1520 requires disability claims to be evaluated through five steps, including whether the claimant can perform past relevant work at step four.

Frank v. Chater · filed 1996-05-01

The fourth step of the sequential evaluation process for determining disability benefits asks whether the claimant can engage in her or his past relevant work. ... Thus, pursuant to this Ruling the relevant inquiry is whether Frank can perform his past relevant work as an attorney in the former Soviet Union regardless of whether a counterpart exists in the United States.

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

Florence BUSH, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Donna E. SHALALA, Secretary of Health and Human Services, Defendant-Appellant · filed 1996-08-23

The burden of proving disability, encompassing the first four of these steps, is on the claimant. The burden of proving the fifth step is on the Secretary.

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

Powell v. Chater · filed 1997-03-07(c), (e)

Regulations promulgated by the Commissioner establish a five-step sequential evaluation process to be followed by the ALJ in a disability case. 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1520, 416.920. ... If the claimant is not currently, engaged in substantial gainful activity, in the Second Step, the ALJ must determine whether the claimant has a severe impairment or combination of impairments significantly limiting him from performing basic work activities; if not, a finding of nondisa-bility is made and the claim is denied. 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1520(c), 416.920(c). ... When the claimant’s impairment does not meet or equal an impairment in Listing, in the Fourth Step, the ALJ must determine whether the claimant has sufficient “residual functional capacity” despite the impairment or various limitations to perform his past work; if so, a finding of nondis-ability is made and the claim is denied. 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1520(e), 416.920(e). ... Accordingly, the ALJ’s implied determination in Step Two, that the plaintiff did not suffer from the severe impairments of chronic fatigue syndrome and fibromyalgia is not supported by substantial evidence. ... The ALJ further erred in Step Four, in determining that the plaintiff retains the residual functional capacity to perform her past relevant work in the banking industry.

Section 404.1520 requires disability claims to be evaluated through a five-step process, with step five asking whether the claimant can perform other substantial gainful work based on age, education, work experience, and residual functional capacity.

Foster v. SSA · filed 1997-12-16

To determine whether an individual is disabled, the ALJ must apply the following five steps: ... (5) Finally, the ALJ adjudicates, on the basis of the claimant's age, education, work experience, and residual functional capacity, whether the applicant can perform any other gainful and substantial work within the economy.

Section 404.1520 places the burden at step five on the Commissioner to show that a claimant can perform other work existing in significant numbers in the relevant economy.

McDonald v. SSA · filed 1998-11-23

McDonald’s application was denied at step five of the sequential evaluation process set forth in 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1520 (1996). 2 At the fifth step, the Commissioner has the burden to show that despite the claimant’s severe impairment, he retained the residual functional capacity to do work other than his prior work during the covered period and that work the claimant can do exists in significant numbers in the relevant economies. See Heggarty v . Sullivan, 947 F.2d 9 9 0 , 995 (1st Cir. 1991).

Section 404.1520(a) uses a five-step sequential evaluation and ends the ALJ’s review when the claimant is found disabled or not disabled at a step.

Moffe v. Apfel · filed 1998-10-22(a)

If a claimant is found to be either disabled or not disabled in any step in this sequential inquiry, the ALJ’s review ends.

Section 404.1520 requires the Commissioner to determine disability through a five-step sequence: substantial gainful activity, severe impairment, listed impairment, past relevant work, and other work.

Rhodes v. Apfel · filed 1999-02-24

To determine whether a claimant is disabled, the Commissioner engages in a five-step evaluation process. See 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1520, 416.920; Bowen v. Yuckert, 482 U.S. 137, 140-42, 107 S.Ct. 2287, 96 L.Ed.2d 119 (1987). In summary, the Commissioner begins by deciding whether the claimant is engaged in substantial gainful activity. If the claimant is working, disability benefits are denied. Next, the Commissioner decides whether the claimant has a "severe impairment," meaning one which significantly limits his ability to do basic work activities. If the claimant's impairment is not severe, then he is not disabled. The Commissioner next determines whether claimant's impairment meets or is equal to one of the impairments listed in 20 C.F.R., Subpart P, Appendix 1. If claimant's impairment is equivalent to one of the listed impairments, he is conclusively disabled. "For a claimant to show that his impairment matches a listing, it must meet all of the specified medical criteria. An impairment that manifests only some of those criteria, no matter how severely, does not qualify." Sullivan v. Zebley, 493 U.S. 521, 530, 110 S.Ct. 885, 107 L.Ed.2d 967 (1990). At the fourth step, the Commissioner establishes whether the claimant can perform his past relevant work. If so, the claimant is not disabled. Finally, the Commissioner evaluates various factors to determine whether the claimant is capable of performing any other work in the economy. If not, the claimant is declared disabled and becomes entitled to disability benefits.

Section 404.1520 uses a five-step sequential evaluation process, with the claimant bearing the burden through the first four steps, including proving inability to perform past relevant work at step four.

Champney v. SSA · filed 1999-02-10

Here, Champney is wrong. It is settled law that the claimant bears the burden of proof throughout the first four steps of the sequential evaluation process. ... At step four of the process, the claimant must prove that her disability is serious enough to prevent her from working at her former job.

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

Tackett v. Apfel · filed 1999-06-25

The Social Security Regulations set out a five-step sequential process for determining whether a claimant is disabled within the meaning of the Social Security Act.

Section 404.1520(a) establishes a sequential five-step process for determining whether a claimant is disabled, and the analysis ends when the claimant is found disabled or not disabled at any step.

Pilcher Ex Rel. Pilcher v. Massanari · filed 2001-05-08(a)

The Social Security Regulations provide a five-step process to determine whether the Claimant has established a “disability.” 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520(a). The process is sequential; if the ALJ finds that the Claimant is disabled or is not disabled at any step in the process, the analysis ends.

Section 404.1520(a) requires disability claims to be evaluated through five sequential steps, with the ALJ permitted to stop when the claimant fails a step and the claimant bearing the burden through step four.

Vicki Banks v. Apfel · filed 2001-07-30(a)

Under the familiar five-part analysis utilized in social security disability cases, the ALJ must determine, sequentially, the following: 1) whether the claimant is employed; 2) whether the claimant has a severe impairment; 3) whether the impairment meets a listed impairment; 4) whether the impairment prevents the claimant from doing past work; and 5) whether the impairment prevents the claimant from doing any other work. See 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520(a)-(f) (1996). If the claimant fails at any step, the ALJ need not continue. The claimant carries the burden of establishing that she is unable to perform her past relevant work, i.e., through step four, at which time the burden shifts to the Commissioner to establish that she maintains the residual functional capacity to perform a significant number of jobs within the national economy.

Section 404.1520 uses a five-step sequential evaluation, and at step five the Commissioner must show that the claimant can perform other work that exists in significant numbers.

Payeur v. SSA · filed 2001-08-14

Payeur's application was denied at step five of the sequential evaluation process set forth in 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520.1 At the fifth step, the Commissioner has the burden to show that despite the claimant's severe impairment, he retained the residual functional capacity ("RFC") to do work other than his prior work during the covered period and that work the claimant can do exists in significant numbers in the relevant economies.

Section 404.1520 places the burden on the claimant at Step 3 to show that an impairment meets or equals a Listing and at Step 4 to show inability to return to past relevant work, then shifts the burden to the Commissioner at Step 5 to show that the claimant can perform other work.

Carson v. Barnhart · filed 2002-12-31(d), (e), (f)

At Step 3, a claimant bears the burden of proving that his impairment or combination of impairments meets or equals an entry in the Listings. 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520(d); ... At Step 4, the plaintiff bears the burden of proof to demonstrate inability to return to past relevant work. 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520(e); ... At this step the commissioner must make findings concerning the plaintiffs residual functional capacity (“RFC”) and the physical and mental demands of past work and determine whether the plaintiffs RFC would permit performance of that work. 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520(e); ... At Step 5, the burden of proof shifts to the commissioner to show that a claimant can perform work other than his past relevant work. 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520(f); ... The record must contain positive evidence in support of the commissioner’s findings regarding the plaintiffs residual work capacity to perform such other work.

Section 404.1520(a) sets out a five-step sequential process for deciding whether a claimant is disabled.

Smith v. Barnhart · filed 2002-12-09(a)

The Commissioner evaluates each case according to a five-step sequential evaluation process until a finding of “disabled” or “not disabled” is made.

Section 404.1520 requires disability claims to be evaluated through a five-step sequence addressing current work, impairment severity and listed impairments, past work, and other work in light of vocational factors.

Irizarry-Sanchez v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2003-03-31

In conclusion, the Court finds that the ALJ properly followed a sequential evaluation process to determine whether Irizarry was disabled whereby he considered: 1) current work activity; 2) severity of the impairments; 3) whether his impairments meet or equal a listed impairment in Appendix 1; 4) ability to do past work; 5) and ability to do other work (in light of his age, education, and work experience.)

Section 404.1520(a) establishes a five-step sequential process for determining disability, and section 404.1520(e) requires consideration of the claimant’s residual functional capacity at step four.

Lewis v. Jo Anne B. Barnhart, Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2003-12-30(a), (e)

The Secretary has established a five-step sequential evaluation process for determining whether a person is disabled. 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520(a) (1986). ... RFC is a medical question defined wholly in terms of the claimant’s physical ability to perform exertional tasks or, in other words, “what the claimant can still do” despite his or her physical or mental limitations. ... 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520(e) (1986).

Section 404.1520 requires an ALJ evaluating disability to use a five-step process and stop once the claimant is found disabled or not disabled.

Klett v. Barnhart · filed 2004-02-19

To determine whether an individual suffers from a disability so that he is eligible to recover child’s insurance benefits; the ALJ must follow the five-step process set forth in 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520. If at any point during the inquiry the ALJ is able to determine that the applicant is or is not disabled, the ALJ ceases the inquiry and renders a decision.

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

Holman v. Barnhart · filed 2004-04-05(a)

In determining whether a claimant is disabled, Social Security regulations outline a five-step sequential process. 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520(a)-(f). The Commissioner must determine in sequence: ... (5) whether the claimant is capable of performing any work in the national economy. ... Therefore, the Commissioner failed to carry her burden at step five of showing the plaintiff could perform other work.

Section 404.1520 requires disability claims to be evaluated through five sequential steps, and evaluation ends when an affirmative determination can be made at any step.

Lane v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2004-06-03(a)

The Commissioner utilizes a five-step sequential evaluation process to evaluate DIB claims. 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1520; Mason v Shalala, 994 F.2d 1058, 1063 (3d Cir. 1993). The process requires the Commissioner to consider, in sequence, whether a claimant: (1) worked during the alleged period of disability; (2) has a severe impairment; (3) has an impairment that meets or equals the requirements of an impairment listed in the regulations and is considered per se disabling; (4) can return to his past relevant work and; (5) if not, whether he can perform other work. 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1520. If an affirmative decision can be reached at any stage in the sequential evaluation process, further evaluation is not necessary. 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1520(a).

Section 404.1520 sets out the five-step sequential process for determining disability, including evaluation at step five of whether the claimant can perform other work.

King v. Barnhart · filed 2004-07-06(a)

In determining whether a claimant is disabled, Social Security regulations outline a five-step sequential process. 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520(a)-(f). ... Therefore, without expert vocational testimony, the ALJ’s determination that the plaintiff can perform other work is not based upon substantial evidence, and the Commissioner failed to carry her burden at step five of showing the plaintiff could perform other work.

Section 404.1520 establishes a five-step sequential process for determining disability, including severity, listed impairments, and the ability to perform past relevant work.

Simmons v. Barnhart · filed 2004-07-29(c) (d) (e)

The Social Security Administration has established a five-step sequential evaluation process for determining whether a claimant is disabled, ... At step one the ALJ determines whether the claimant is presently engaged in substantial gainful activity. ... The second step of the evaluation process involves a determination of whether “the claimant has a medically severe impairment or combination of impairments.” ... In step three, the ALJ “determines whether the impairment is equivalent to one of a number of listed impairments that the Secretary acknowledges are so severe as to preclude substantial gainful activity.” ... If not, the evaluation proceeds to the fourth step, where the claimant must show that the “impairment prevents [the claimant] from performing work he has performed in the past.” ... Thus, the ALJ proceeded to the fifth and final step of the sequential evaluation process-determining whether the claimant has the RFC “to perform other work in the national economy in view of his age, education, and work experience.”

Section 404.1520 requires disability claims to be evaluated through a five-step process, with the burden shifting to the Commissioner after the claimant establishes disability through the first four steps.

YUCH v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2005-03-16

To determine disability, the Commissioner has prescribed the five-step process noted above and set forth in 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520. However, if the plaintiff has satisfied his burden through the first four steps of the analytical process, as here, the burden shifts to the Commissioner to establish that the plaintiff possesses the residual functional capacity to perform other substantial gainful activity.

Section 404.1520(a) uses a five-step sequential analysis and does not require further review once an individual is found not disabled at any point in that analysis.

Long v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2005-04-28(a)

Further review is .not necessary if it is determined that an individual is not disabled at any point in this sequential analysis. 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520(a). Here, the sequential analysis proceeded to the fifth step.

Section 404.1520(a) requires the Commissioner to conduct the five-step disability inquiry in order, completing that inquiry before separately evaluating whether alcoholism or drug addiction is material to disability.

McGhee v. Barnhart · filed 2005-04-28(a)

The Commissioner uses a five-step process in evaluating DIB claims. ... This process requires the Commissioner to consider, in order, whether a claimant 1) is working; 2) has a severe impairment; 3) has an impairment that meets or equals the requirements of a listed impairment; 4) can return to his past relevant work; and 5) if not, whether he can perform other work. ... If the Commissioner finds conclusively' that a claimant is or is not disabled at any point in this process, review does not proceed to the next step. ... Thus, under the Commissioner’s regulations, an ALJ must first conduct the five-step disability inquiry without considering the impact of alcoholism or drug addiction. If the ALJ finds that the claimant is not disabled under the five-step inquiry, then the claimant is not entitled to benefits, and there would be no need to proceed with the analysis under 20 C.F.R. § 404.1535.

Section 404.1520 requires a sequential five-step disability analysis, and the evaluation need not continue once the claimant is found not disabled at any step.

Long v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2005-04-28(a)

Further review is .not necessary if it is determined that an individual is not disabled at any point in this sequential analysis. 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520(a). Here, the sequential analysis proceeded to the fifth step.

Section 404.1520 requires an ALJ evaluating disability to proceed through five inquiries: substantial gainful activity, severe impairment, listed impairment, past relevant work, and other work.

Force v. SSA · filed 2006-05-02

When determining whether a claimant is disabled, the ALJ is also required to make the following five inquiries: (1) whether the claimant is engaged in substantial gainful activity; (2) whether the claimant has a severe impairment; (3) whether the impairment meets or equals a listed impairment; (4) whether the impairment prevents the claimant from performing past relevant work; and (5) whether the impairment prevents the claimant from doing any other work. 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520.

Section 404.1520 establishes a five-step sequential disability evaluation, allowing the analysis to end at any step; at step two, the ALJ must evaluate whether the claimant has a medically severe impairment or combination of impairments.

Crider v. Barnhart · filed 2006-03-14(a), (b), (c), (d), (e), and (f)

The Commissioner has established a five-step process to determine whether a claimant qualifies for disability-insurance benefits. ... A claimant may be declared disabled or not disabled at any step; and, upon such a determination, the subsequent steps may be disregarded. ... First, the claimant must demonstrate that he is not currently involved in any substantial gainful activity. ... Second, the claimant must show a medically severe impairment (or combination of impairments) which limits his physical or mental ability to do basic work activities. ... At the third step, if the impairment matches or is equivalent to established listings, then the claimant is judged conclusively disabled. ... If the claimant’s impairments are not equivalent to the listings, the analysis proceeds to the fourth step. At this stage, the claimant must show that the impairment prevents him from performing work he has performed in the past. ... If the claimant is able to perform his previous work, he is not disabled. ... The fifth step requires the Commissioner to demonstrate that the claimant has the RFC to perform other work based on the claimant’s age, education, past work experience, and there is availability of that type of work in the national economy. ... At step two, the ALJ is to determine whether Plaintiff has an “impairment or combination of impairments which significantly limits [his] ... ability to do basic work activities.” ... Thus, the ALJ had an obligation to evaluate Plaintiffs fibromyalgia at step two of the sequential evaluation. ... For the reasons stated above, the ALJ’s decision at step two of the sequential evaluation is not supported by substantial evidence in the record.

Section 404.1520 sets out a five-step process for evaluating disability claims, with the claimant bearing the burden through step four and the Commissioner bearing the burden at step five.

Dixon v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2006-06-07(4)(i)

The Commissioner uses a five-step process to evaluate whether an individual qualifies for disability benefits. 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520. The Commissioner assesses (1) whether an individual is currently engaged in substantial gainful activity; (2) whether the individual’s impairment is severe; (3) whether the individual’s impairment meets or equals a listed impairment; (4) the individual’s residual functional capacity and their past relevant work; and (5) whether an individual is able to perform other work available in the national economy. 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520(4)(i) - (v). The claimant has the burden of proof on the first four steps and the Commissioner has the burden on step five. Bowen v. Yuckert, 482 U.S. 137, 146 n.5 (1987).

Section 404.1520(a)(4) establishes a five-step sequential process for determining disability, ending once a determination of disabled or not disabled can be made.

Swartz v. Barnhart · filed 2006-07-13(a)(4)

Federal regulations establish a five-part sequential evaluation process for determining when a claimant is disabled. 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520(a)(4). As soon as a determination of disabled or not disabled can be made, the evaluation process ends. Id. In order, the five steps are: (1) if the claimant is “doing substantial gainful activity,” he or she is “not disabled”; (2) if the claimant does “not have a severe medically determinable physical or mental impairment that meets the duration requirement . . . or a combination of impairments that is severe and meets the duration requirement,” the claimant is “not disabled”; (3) if the claimant has a severe impairment and the “medical severity” of the claimant’s impairment(s) “meets or equals” a listed impairment, the claimant is “disabled”; (4) if the “medical severity” does not meet or equal a listed impairment, the claimant’s “residual functional capacity” is assessed and if the claimant can do his or her “past relevant work,” the claimant is “not disabled”; and (5) if the claimant cannot do his or her “past relevant work,” but has the residual functional capacity, taking into account the claimant’s “age, education, and work experience” to “make an adjustment to other work,” the claimant is “not disabled.” Id.

Section 404.1520 requires disability claims to be evaluated through a five-step sequential process, with residual functional capacity assessed before steps four and five.

Beauclair v. Barnhart · filed 2006-09-20

The Commissioner has established a five-step sequential process to evaluate whether a claimant is disabled. 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520 (2003); ... “If a determination can be made at any of the steps that a claimant is or is not disabled, evaluation under a subsequent step is not necessary.” ... In the first three steps, the Commissioner determines whether claimant has engaged in substantial gainful activity since the alleged onset, whether he has severe impairments, and whether the severity of his impairments meets or equals the Listing of Impairments. ... The Commissioner next assesses claimant’s residual functional capacity (RFC). 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520 (2004). ... This assessment is used at both step four and step five of the process. ... At step two of the sequential evaluation, the ALJ noted that spinal disorder is not medically determinable in this case and that plaintiffs depression is not severe. (R. 19). However, although the ALJ recognized the diagnoses of IBS, he did not discuss IBS in his consideration of “severe” impairments at step two. Further, the ALJ did not discuss IBS in his RFC assessment. These failures are error requiring remand.

Section 404.1520 requires the ALJ to evaluate disability through five sequential inquiries: substantial gainful activity, severe impairment, listed impairment, past relevant work, and other work.

Ramsey v. SSA · filed 2007-02-13

When determining whether a claimant is disabled, the ALJ is also required to make the following five inquiries: (1) whether the claimant is engaged in substantial gainful activity; (2) whether the claimant has a severe impairment; (3) whether the impairment meets or equals a listed impairment; (4) whether the impairment prevents the claimant from performing past relevant work; and (5) whether the impairment prevents the claimant from doing any other work. 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520.

Section 404.1520 requires disability claims to be evaluated through a five-step sequence, ending the review when disability or non-disability is established at any step.

Orriols v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2007-04-25(a)(4)

To determine disability, the Commissioner uses a five-step sequential evaluation process. 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520; see also Plummer v. Apfel, 186 F.3d 422, 428 (3d Cir. 1999). If a finding of disability or non-disability can be made at any point in the sequential analysis, the Commissioner will not review the claim further. 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520(a)(4).

Section 404.1520(a)(4) requires a five-step disability evaluation, under which a claimant whose impairment meets or equals a listed impairment at step three is deemed disabled without further analysis.

Bordes v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2007-05-18(a)(4), (a)(4)(iii)

SSA regulations set forth a sequential five-step evaluation process for determining whether a claimant is disabled. Id.; 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520(a)(4). First, the ALJ “must determine whether the claimant currently is engaging in substantial gainful activity.” If the claimant is, he will be found not disabled. Newell, 347 F.3d at 545. If not, at step two the ALJ determines “whether the claimant has a medically severe impairment or combination of impairments.” Id. If not, the disability claim will be denied. Id. If so, at step three the ALJ must “compare [] the medical evidence of the claimant’s impairment to a list of impairments presumed severe enough to preclude any gainful work.” Id. If the claimant’s impairment meets or equals a listed impairment, the disability claim will be granted without any further analysis. Id. at 545-46; 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520(a)(4)(iii).

Section 404.1520(a) requires disability claims to be evaluated through a five-step sequence addressing current work, impairment severity, listed impairments, past work, and other work in the national economy.

Cox v. Astrue · filed 2007-07-26(a)

The ALJ considered Cox’s impairment by conducting the familiar five-step evaluation set forth in 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520(a)-(g) (2004). Under the regulations, the ALJ determines: (1) whether the claimant is currently engaged in substantial gainful activity; (2) whether the claimant’s impairments are so severe that they significantly limit the claimant’s physical or mental ability to perform basic work activities; (3) whether the claimant has impairments that meet or equal a presumptively disabling impairment specified in the regulations; (4) whether the claimant’s RFC is sufficient for her to perform her past work; and finally, if the claimant cannot perform her past work, the burden shifts to the Commissioner to prove that (5) there are other jobs in the national economy that the claimant can perform given the claimant’s RFC, age, education and work experience.

Section 404.1520 establishes a five-step disability-evaluation process, and satisfying the step-two severity threshold does not by itself determine whether non-exertional limitations require vocational-expert testimony at step five.

Hoopai v. Barnhart · filed 2007-08-27

Therefore, we hold that satisfaction of the step-two threshold requirement that a claimant prove her limitations are severe is not dispositive of the step-five determination of whether the non-exertional limitations are sufficiently severe such as to invalidate the ALJ’s exclusive use of the grids without the assistance of a vocational expert. Instead, an ALJ is required to seek the assistance of a vocational expert when the non-exertional limitations are at a sufficient level of severity such as to make the grids inapplicable to the particular case.

Section 404.1520 evaluates disability claims through a five-step sequential process, including whether the claimant can perform past relevant work and, if not, whether other work can be performed.

Cruse v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2007-09-24(a)(4)

To identify claimants who qualify as disabled, the Commissioner uses a five-step “ ‘sequential evaluation process.’ ” ... The five steps are as follows: ... 1) A claimant who is engaging in substantial gainful activity will not be found to be disabled regardless of medical findings. ... 2) A claimant who does not have a severe impairment will not be found to be disabled. ... 3) A finding of disability will be made without consideration of vocational factors, if a claimant is not working and is suffering from a severe impairment which meets the duration requirement and which meets or equals a listed impairment in Appendix 1 to Subpart P of the Regulations. Claimants with lesser impairments proceed to step four. ... 4) A claimant who can perform work that he has done in the past will not be found to be disabled. ... 5) If a claimant cannot perform his past work, other factors including age, education, past work experience and residual functional capacity must be considered to determine if other work can be performed.

Section 404.1520's five-step process does not make a step-two finding that an impairment is severe dispositive of whether step-five non-exertional limitations require vocational-expert testimony.

Hoopai v. Astrue · filed 2007-08-27

Therefore, we hold that satisfaction of the step-two threshold requirement that a claimant prove her limitations are severe is not dispositive of the step-five determination of whether the non-exertional limitations are sufficiently severe such as to invalidate the ALJ’s exclusive use of the grids without the assistance of a vocational expert.

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

Townsend v. Astrue · filed 2007-10-02(a)

To make this determination, one must employ a five-step sequential analysis. 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520(a)-(f). Under this process, the ALJ must inquire, in the following order: (1) whether the claimant is engaged in substantial gainful employment; (2) whether the claimant has a severe impairment; (3) whether the claimant’s impairment meets or equals a listed impairment; (4) whether the claimant can perform past relevant work; and (5) whether the claimant is capable of performing any work in the national economy.

Section 404.1520(a)(4) requires an ALJ to evaluate disability claims using a five-step sequential analysis, including consideration of other work at the final step.

McGlothin v. Commissioner of Social Securit · filed 2008-10-31(a)(4)

In applying the above standard, an ALJ must follow the five-step analysis set forth in 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520(a)(4) and summarized by this court as follows: ... 5. Even if claimant’s impairment does prevent him from doing his past relevant work, if other work exists in the national economy that accommodates his residual functional capacity and vocational factors (age, education, skills, etc.), he is not disabled.

At the final step of the sequential evaluation, a claimant is not disabled if, despite a severe impairment preventing past relevant work, the claimant retains the residual functional capacity to adjust to other work.

Carson v. Commissioner of Social Security Administration · filed 2008-11-21(a)(4)

Under the five-stop process, even if a claimant’s impairment is severe and prevents him from doing his past relevant work, he is not considered disabled if he retains the RFC to make an adjustment to other work. 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520(a)(4).

Section 404.1520(a)(4) requires disability determinations to proceed through the sequential steps only as necessary; if disability is resolved before step five, the analysis ends.

WHITZELL v. Astrue · filed 2008-12-10(a)(4)

The applicable regulation, 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520, provides that the hearing officer must proceed step by step, i.e. if the question of disability is resolved prior to the fifth step, analysis ends. 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520(a)(4).

Section 404.1520 requires an ALJ initially to apply the five-step disability evaluation without segregating effects attributable to substance use disorders.

Viers v. Astrue · filed 2008-10-22(a)

“The ALJ must reach this determination initially ... using the five-step approach described in 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520 without segregating out any effects that might be due to substance use disorders.”

Section 404.1520 requires determining disability through a five-step sequential evaluation process, in which the answer at each step determines whether the next step must be considered.

MACHIA v. Astrue · filed 2009-11-16

To determine whether a- claimant is “disabled,” the regulations require application of the now familiar five step sequential evaluation process. ... The answer to the inquiry at each step determines whether the next step’s question must also be answered. Step one asks whether the claimant has engaged in substantial gainful activity since the alleged onset date of disability; if not then step two asks whether the claimant has any “impairments” that are “severe”; if one or more “severe impairments” are found then step three asks whether any of these impairments meet or equal one of the listed impairments found in Appendix I of 20 C.F.R. § 404.1599; if an impairment meets or equals a listed impairment then the claimant is deemed “disabled,” if not, step four asks whether the claimant retains the Residual Functional Capacity (“RFC”) to do his or her past relevant work; and, finally, if the claimant is unable to do prior relevant work, step five asks whether the claimant is able to do any job available in significant numbers in the national economy.

Section 404.1520(a)(4) requires disability claims to be evaluated through a five-step sequence, ending the inquiry if the claimant is found not disabled at any step; at step four, the ALJ assesses residual functional capacity and ability to perform past relevant work.

Ehrisman v. Astrue · filed 2010-05-05(a)(4)

An individual seeking disability benefits or supplemental security income must prove that she is disabled and unable to perform her past relevant work. ... The Social Security regulations outline a five-step, sequential evaluation process to determine whether a claimant is disabled. ... If the ALJ determines that the claimant is not disabled at any step of the evaluation process, the inquiry ends. 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1520(a)(4), 416.920(a)(4). At step four of the sequential evaluation process, the ALJ assesses the claimant’s RFC and ability to do past relevant work. Id. §§ 404.1520(a)(4)(iv), 416.920(a)(4)(iv). ... Accordingly, we find that the ALJ did not err at step four of the sequential analysis.

Section 404.1520(a) requires disability claims to be evaluated through a five-step sequential process, including determining at step four whether the claimant can perform past relevant work.

Payne v. Barnhart · filed 2010-07-27(a)

The Social Security Administration has established a five-step sequential evaluation process for assessing a claimant’s alleged disability. See 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1520, 416.920. ... Nevertheless, the ALJ did not find that plaintiff’s impairment was severe enough to meet the requirements of step four, which requires a determination that plaintiff was incapable of performing past relevant work. ... While duties of a security officer may be sedentary, the Court sees nothing in the record to support the ALJ’s determination that, given Payne’s inability to concentrate, he would be mentally capable of performing the duties of a security guard.

Section 404.1520 requires disability claims to be evaluated through a sequential process, with the evaluation ending once the claimant is found disabled or not disabled.

Brown v. Astrue · filed 2011-05-19(a)

Social Security Administration regulations incorporate a sequential evaluation process for determining whether a claimant is under a disability. 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520. The ALJ first considers whether the claimant is currently engaged in substantial gainful activity. If she is not, then the ALJ considers in the second step whether the claimant has a “severe impairment” that significantly limits his physical or mental ability to perform basic work activities. If the claimant suffers a severe impairment, the third inquiry is whether, based on the medical evidence, the impairment meets the criteria of an impairment listed in the “listing of impairments,” 20 C.F.R. pt. 404, subpt. P, app. 1 (1999), which result in a presumption of disability, or whether the claimant retains the capacity to work. If the impairment does not meet the criteria for a listed impairment, then the ALJ assesses in the fourth step whether, despite the severe impairment, the claimant has the residual functional capacity to perform his past work. If the claimant cannot perform her past work, then step five is to determine whether there is other work in the national economy that the claimant can perform. ... If the ALJ finds that a claimant is disabled or not disabled at any point in the sequence, review does not proceed to the next step. 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520(a).

Section 404.1520(a)(4)(v) places the burden on the Commissioner at step five to show that a claimant can adjust to other work, and the sequential inquiry ends when disability can be decided earlier.

Thompson v. Astrue · filed 2011-08-10(a)(4)(v)

As the magistrate judge noted, SSR 96-9p is not applicable to this case. Here, the sequential evaluation terminated at Step Four, where Thompson had the burden of proving she could not perform past relevant work. The evaluation never proceeded to Step Five, where the Commissioner would have been required to prove that Thompson could “make an adjustment to other work.” 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1520(a)(4)(v), 416.920(a)(4)(v) (emphasis added); Yuckert, 482 U.S. at 146 n.5. Thus, the Medical-Vocational Rules, Thompson’s occupational base, and the impact of any exertional or nonexertional limitations on that base were never in issue in this case.

Section 404.1520(g) does not require an ALJ to proceed to the fifth step when the claimant has already been properly found not disabled at step four.

Diaz v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2011-07-27(g)

Because the ALJ’s decision to deny Diaz benefit at step four was supported by substantial evidence, the ALJ was not required to reach the fifth step. See 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1520(g), 416.920(g). Thus, a remand is not necessary.

Section 404.1520(c) requires the ALJ at step two to determine whether the claimant has a severe impairment that significantly limits basic work activities; subsection (a)(4)(iii) requires a finding of disability when an impairment meets or medically equals a Listing and the duration requirement.

Taylor v. Astrue · filed 2012-09-26(c), (a)(4)(iii)

At step two of the sequential evaluation process, the ALJ must determine whether the claimant has a severe impairment that significantly limits his or her physical or mental ability to do basic work activities. ... If a claimant suffers from an impairment or combination of impairments that meets or medically equals one of the impairments contained in the Listings, the claimant will be considered disabled.

Section 404.1520 requires disability claims to be evaluated through a five-step sequence, including a severity determination at step two and a listed-impairment determination at step three.

Niles v. Astrue · filed 2012-09-29(c), (a)(4)(iii)

At step two of the sequential evaluation process, the ALJ must determine whether the claimant has a severe impairment that significantly limits his or her physical or mental ability to do basic work activities. ... Impairments listed in Appendix 1 of the Social Security Regulations are “acknowledged by the [Commissioner] to be of sufficient severity to preclude” substantial gainful activity. Accordingly, a claimant who meets or equals a Listing is “conclusively presumed to be disabled and entitled to benefits.” ... In the face of this evidence, the ALJ was obliged to explain, in detail, his rationale for finding that Plaintiffs impairments did not meet or medically equal Listing § 1.04A.

Section 404.1520(a)(4) requires disability claims to be evaluated through five sequential steps, considered in order, from substantial gainful activity through the claimant’s ability to perform other work.

Greene v. Colvin · filed 2013-04-05(a)(4)

The hearing officer must ascertain whether (1) the claimant is engaged in substantial gainful activity; (2) the claimant suffers a severe impairment; (3) the impairment matches or medically resembles an impairment listed under 20 C.F.R. Part 404, Subpart P, Appendix 1, and complies with the duration requirement; (4) the claimant keeps the residual functional capacity to perform her past relevant work; and (5) the impairment precludes the claimant from performing other work considering the claimant’s age, education, and work experience. Id. §§ 404.1520(a)(4)(i)-(v), 416.920(a)(4)(i)-(v). ... The steps must be considered in order. 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1520(a)(4), 416.920(a)(4).

Section 404.1520 requires a five-step disability evaluation, including a step-two determination of whether the claimant has a severe impairment and a step-five determination of whether the claimant can perform other work.

Hamilton v. Colvin · filed 2013-03-12(c), (f)

At step two of the sequential evaluation process, the ALJ must determine whether the claimant has a severe impairment that significantly limits his or her physical or mental ability to do basic work activities. ... At step 5 in the sequential evaluation, the ALJ was required to perform a two part process to first assess Plaintiffs job qualifications by considering his physical ability, age, education, and work experience, and then determine whether jobs exist in the national economy that Plaintiff could perform.

Section 404.1520 requires an ALJ to assess a claimant's residual functional capacity at the fourth step of the sequential evaluation process.

Register v. Colvin · filed 2013-05-10(a)(4)(iv)

At the fourth step of the sequential evaluation process, the ALJ must assess the claimant’s RFC. 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520(a)(4)(iv)-(v).

Section 404.1520(a)(4) requires the sequential evaluation to stop once the claimant is classified at a step; after finding that the claimant medically equaled a listing at step three, the court held that steps four and five were irrelevant.

Lee v. Colvin · filed 2014-06-25(a)(4)

“If a claimant can be classified at any step, the Commissioner does not go on to the next step. 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520(a)(4).” ... Here, Plaintiff medically equals the listing which qualifies her for the benefits for which she applied. Argu-ments about steps 4 and 5 are of no consequence because the sequential evaluation ended at step 3.

Section 404.1520's sequential evaluation considers age, education, past work experience, and residual functional capacity at steps three through five, so those considerations do not require remand when the disability analysis properly ends at step two.

Thomas v. Carolyn Colvin, Acting Cmsnr · filed 2014-10-21(a)(4)(iv)-(v), (c)

However, the ALJ’s five-step analysis only incorporates such considerations during steps three through five; since we have concluded that the ALJ’s decision was sufficiently supported at step two, these issues are not grounds for remand.

Section 404.1520 requires a sequential disability evaluation and ends the inquiry once the claimant is found disabled or not disabled at a step.

Hyer v. Colvin · filed 2014-10-28(a)

Social Security Administration regulations incorporate a sequential evaluation process for determining whether a claimant is under a disability. 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520. ... If the ALJ finds that a claimant is disabled or not disabled at any point in the sequence, review does not proceed to the next step. 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520(a).

Section 404.1520 sets out a five-step sequential evaluation for deciding disability claims: whether the claimant is working, has a severe impairment, meets a listed impairment, can perform past relevant work, and, if not, can perform other work existing in significant numbers in the national economy.

Cummings v. Colvin · filed 2015-07-07

When deciding whether a claimant is disabled, the Commissioner utilizes a five-step sequential evaluation. 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1520 and 416.920. This process requires the Commissioner to consider, in sequence, whether a claimant (1) is working, (2) has a severe impairment, (3) has an impairment that.meets or equals the requirements of a listed impairment, (4) can return to his or her.past relevant work, and (5) if not, whether , he or she can perform other work that exists in significant numbers in the national economy.

Section 404.1520(a)(4) permits the disability evaluation to end once a determination can be made at one step, without evaluating a subsequent step.

Adams v. Colvin · filed 2015-10-15(a)(4)

Because we discern no grounds for overturning the finding of no disability at step four, we need not reach the ALJ’s alternative step-five determination. Lax v. Astrue, 489 F.3d 1080, 1084 (10th Cir. 2007) (“If a determination can be made at any of the steps that a claimant is or is not disabled, evaluation under a subsequent step is not necessary.” (internal quotation marks omitted)); 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520(a)(4) (same).

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

Villarreal v. Colvin · filed 2016-11-22

Regulations set forth by the Commissioner prescribe that disability claims are to be evaluated according to a five-step process.

Section 404.1520 establishes a five-step disability analysis, with the claimant bearing the burden through the first four steps and the Commissioner bearing it at step five; at step four, a claimant who can perform past relevant work is not disabled.

Natsis v. SSA · filed 2017-03-16(a)(4)(iv)

In determining whether a claimant is disabled for purposes of social security benefits, the ALJ follows a five-step sequential analysis. 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1520. The claimant bears the burden through the first four steps of proving that his impairments preclude him from working. Freeman v. Barnhart, 274 F.3d 606, 608 (1st Cir. 2001). At the fifth step, the Acting Commissioner has the burden of showing that jobs exist which the claimant can do. Heggarty v. Sullivan, 947 F.2d 990, 995 (1st Cir. 1991). ... At the fourth step of the sequential analysis, the ALJ assesses the claimant’s residual functional capacity, which is a determination of the most a person can do in a work setting despite her limitations caused by impairments, see 20 C.F.R. § 404.1545(a)(1), and his past relevant work, see id. at § 404.1520(a)(4)(iv)). If the claimant can perform his past relevant work, the ALJ will find that the claimant is not disabled. See id. at § 404.1520(a)(4)(iv)).

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

Garneau v. SSA · filed 2017-10-10

To decide whether a claimant is disabled for the purpose of determining eligibility for disability insurance benefits, an ALJ is required to employ a five-step process. See 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520. The steps are: 1) if the [claimant] is engaged in substantial gainful work activity, the application is denied; 2) if the [claimant] does not have, or has not had within the relevant time period, a severe impairment or combination of impairments, the application is denied; 3) if the impairment meets the conditions for one of the “listed” impairments in the Social Security regulations, then the application is granted; 4) if the [claimant’s] “residual functional capacity” is such that he or she can still perform past relevant work, then the application is denied; 5) if the [claimant], given his or her residual functional capacity, education, work experience, and age, is unable to do any other work, the application is granted.

Section 404.1520(c) requires the ALJ at Step Two to screen for an impairment or combination of impairments that significantly limits basic work activities, and § 404.1520(d) requires the ALJ at Step Three to determine whether the claimant has an impairment listed in Appendix 1.

Prince v. Berryhill · filed 2018-01-19(c), (d)

At Step Two of the sequential evaluation process, the ALJ must determine whether a claimant has an impairment or combination of impairments that significantly limits his or her physical or mental ability to do basic work activities. ... At Step Three, the ALJ must determine whether a claimant has an impairment listed in Appendix 1 of the Regulations.

Section 404.1520(a)(4) requires disability claims to be evaluated through a five-step sequence, stopping when the claimant is found disabled or not disabled at a step.

Bullard v. Commissioner, Social Security Administration · filed 2018-09-28(a)(4)

The ALJ uses a five-step, sequential evaluation process to determine whether a claimant is disabled. Winschel v. Comm’r of Soc. Sec., 631 F.3d 1176, 1178 (11th Cir. 2011). This five-step process asks whether the claimant: (1) is unable to engage in substantial gainful activity; (2) has a severe and medically determinable impairment; (3) has an impairment, or combination thereof, that meets or equals a Listing, and meets the duration requirement; (4) can perform past relevant work, in light of his residual functional capacity (“RFC”); and (5) can make the adjustment to other work, in light of his RFC, age, education, and work experience. See id.; 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520(a)(4). If the ALJ finds a claimant disabled or not disabled at any given step, the ALJ does not proceed to the next step. 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520(a)(4).

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

Jones v. Social Security Administration · filed 2018-11-07

The Commissioner has established a five-step sequential evaluation process for assessing a claimant’s alleged disability. See 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1520, 416.920. ... Once a claimant has carried the burden on the first four steps, the burden shifts to the Commissioner on step five to demonstrate that the claimant is able to perform “other work” based on a consideration of her “residual functional capacity” (RFC), age, education and past work experience. Id. §§ 404.1520(f), 416.920(f).

Section 404.1520(a)(4) requires disability to be evaluated through a five-step sequence: substantial gainful activity, severe impairment, listed impairment, ability to perform past relevant work, and ability to perform other work.

Crockett v. Berryhill · filed 2019-01-18(a)(4)

In all Social Security cases, an ALJ utilizes a five-step sequential evaluation to determine whether the claimant is disabled, which considers: (1) whether the claimant is engaged in substantial gainful activity; (2) if not, whether the claimant has a severe impairment; (3) if so, whether the severe impairment meets or equals an impairment in the Listing of Impairments in the regulations; (4) if not, whether the claimant has the RFC to perform h[is] past relevant work; and (5) if not, whether, in light of the claimant’s RFC, age, education and work experience, there are other jobs the claimant can perform.

Section 404.1520 establishes a five-step process for deciding disability claims, including automatic disability at step three when an impairment meets or equals a listed impairment.

Knox v. Berryhill · filed 2019-03-27(d)

The Social Security regulations provide a five-step sequential evaluation process for determining whether a claimant has proven his or her disability. 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520. The claimant must first prove that he or she is not engaged in substantial gainful activity. ... If, at the third step, the claimant proves that the impairment or combination of impairments meets or equals a listed impairment, then the claimant is automatically found disabled regardless of age, education, or work experience.

Section 404.1520(a)(4) requires an ALJ to evaluate disability through five sequential steps and end the inquiry if the claimant is found not disabled at any step.

Meehan v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2019-06-10(a)(4)

SSA regulations outline a sequential evaluation process to determine whether a claimant is disabled. See 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520(a)(4). The ALJ must evaluate whether (1) the claimant engaged in substantial gainful activity; (2) the claimant has a severe impairment; (3) the severe impairment meets or equals an impairment in the Listing of Impairments; (4) the claimant has the RFC to perform past relevant work; and (5) in light of the claimant’s RFC, age, education, and work experience, there are other jobs the claimant can perform. Phillips v. Barnhart, 357 F.3d 1232, 1237 (11th Cir. 2004); 20 C.F.R §§ 404.1520(a)(4), 416.920(a)(4). If the ALJ determines that the claimant is not disabled at any step of the evaluation process, the inquiry ends. 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1520(a)(4), 416.920(a)(4).

Section 404.1520 requires a five-step disability evaluation, including a step-three comparison to the listings and a step-five showing by the Commissioner that the claimant can perform other available work.

SPINELLI v. COMMISSIONER OF SOCIAL SECURITY · filed 2019-07-09(d), (f)

The “five step sequential evaluation for determining whether a claimant is under a disability, as set forth in 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520” is explained as follows: ... In step three, the Commissioner compares the medical evidence of the claimant’s impairment to a list of impairments presumed severe enough to preclude any gainful work. 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520(d). If a claimant does not suffer from a listed impairment or its equivalent, the analysis proceeds to steps four and five. ... If the claimant is unable to resume her former occupation, the evaluation moves to the final step. At this stage, the burden of production shifts to the Commissioner, who must demonstrate the claimant is capable of performing other available work in order to deny a claim of disability. 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520(f). The ALJ must show there are other jobs existing in significant numbers in the national economy which the claimant can perform, consistent with her medical impairments, age, education, past work experience, and residual functional capacity.

Section 404.1520 establishes a five-step disability evaluation and places the step-five burden on the Commissioner to show that the claimant can perform a significant number of jobs in the national economy.

Jones v. Berryhill · filed 2019-08-02

At the administrative level of review, the claimant's case is considered under a five-step sequential evaluation process summarized as follows: ... (5) The burden then shifts to the Commissioner to establish the claimant's ability to work by proving the existence of a significant number of jobs in the national economy which the claimant could perform, given his or her age, experience, education, and residual functional capacity. See, e.g. 20 CFR §§ 404.1520, 416.920. ... In the instant action, the hypothetical question posed to the VE by the ALJ, upon which the ALJ relied to establish the existence of a significant number of jobs in the national economy that Plaintiff could perform, accurately reflected the limitations that the ALJ found credible, consistent with, and supported by, the evidence of record.

Section 404.1520(a)(4) establishes the five-step sequential process an ALJ uses to determine whether an individual is entitled to disability benefits.

Puckett v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2019-08-08(a)(4)

To determine whether an individual is entitled to disability benefits, an ALJ follows the process outlined in 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520. First, the ALJ considers whether the claimant has substantial gainful employment. 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520(a)(4). Second, the ALJ considers whether the claimant has suffered from a severe medically determinable physical or mental impairment, or combination of impairments, for a certain duration. Id. Third, the ALJ considers whether the impairments meet or equal one of the specific medical disorders listed in the regulations. Id. Fourth, the ALJ assesses the claimant’s RFC and past relevant work. Id. Fifth, the ALJ determines whether given the claimant’s RFC, age, education, and work experiences, the individual can make certain adjustments to keep working. Id.

At step two, § 404.1520 treats severity as a threshold inquiry: once any severe impairment is found, the sequential evaluation continues, and failure to identify another severe impairment is harmless.

Mainella v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2019-08-09(a)(4)(ii)

These regulations establish a “sequential evaluation process” to determine whether a claimant is disabled. 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1520, 416.920. ... Under this process, the ALJ must determine, in sequence, the following: whether the claimant is currently engaged in substantial gainful activity; whether the claimant has a severe impairment, i.e., one that significantly limits the ability to perform work-related functions; whether the severe impairment meets or equals the medical criteria of 20 C.F.R. Part 404 Subpart P, Appendix 1; and whether the claimant can perform his or her past relevant work. ... Notably, step two of the sequential evaluation process operates as a threshold inquiry. ... Notably, however, the finding of any severe impairment, whether or not it results from a single severe impairment or a combination or impairments that together qualify as severe, is enough to satisfy step two. ... Accordingly, since the ALJ determined that Plaintiff suffered from multiple severe impairments at step two, and then proceeded beyond step two in the sequential analysis, any error in failing to find that Plaintiff suffered from other severe impairments is rendered harmless.

Section 404.1520(a)(4) establishes a five-step sequential evaluation, and a step-two error is harmless when the claimant has another severe impairment and the ALJ considers all impairments in later steps.

(SS) Kaur v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2019-08-26(a)(4)

The Commissioner uses a five-step sequential evaluation process to determine whether an applicant is disabled and entitled to benefits. 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1520(a)(4), 416.920(a)(4); ... Thus, when an ALJ finds at least one severe impairment and proceeds to consider evidence of limitations posed by all of a claimant’s impairments at Step Four, there is no reversible error for a failure to find additional severe impairments at Step Two.

Section 404.1520 requires disability claims to be evaluated sequentially, with benefits awarded only if the claimant cannot perform other work at step five.

Henderson v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2019-08-26(a), (g)

If the claimant cannot perform the tasks required of his or her prior work, step five of the evaluation requires the ALJ to decide if the claimant can do other work in the national economy in view of his or her age, education, and work experience. 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1520(a), 416.920(a). A claimant is entitled to benefits only if unable to perform other work. Bowen v. Yuckert, 482 U.S. 137, 140-42 (1987); 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1520(g), 416.920(g).

Section 404.1520(a)(4) requires a sequential, step-by-step disability evaluation considering current work activity, impairment severity, residual functional capacity, and vocational factors; the RFC is used at steps four and five.

Smith v. Berryhill · filed 2019-08-30(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 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. If not, the ALJ determines the claimant’s RFC, which the ALJ uses at steps four and five. 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520(a)(4).

Section 404.1520 requires disability claims to proceed through a five-step sequential evaluation, with later steps considered when an impairment should have been treated as medically determinable.

Acton v. Berryhill · filed 2019-09-06

The Commissioner has established a five-step evaluation process to determine whether an individual is disabled as defined by the Social Security Act. 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1520, 416.920. ... In this case, the ALJ did not find this impairment medically determinable and, therefore did not consider it at the subsequent steps in the sequential evaluation. However, because it is unclear whether it should have been found medically determinable and a subsequent conclusion made on its severity, the Court cannot find any potential error regarding the ALJ’s consideration of Plaintiff’s alleged MS to be harmless.

Section 404.1520 requires an ALJ to use a five-step sequential evaluation, including determining at step one whether the claimant engages in substantial gainful activity and at step four whether the claimant's residual functional capacity permits past relevant work.

White v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2019-09-11(b), (f)

An ALJ must follow a five-step sequential evaluation to determine whether a claimant is disabled within the meaning of the Act. See Parker v. City of New York, 476 U.S. 467, 470-71 (1986). At step one, the ALJ must determine whether the claimant is engaged in substantial gainful work activity. See 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520(b). If so, the claimant is not disabled. If not, the ALJ proceeds to step two and determines whether the claimant has an impairment, or combination of impairments, that is “severe” within the meaning of the Act, meaning that it imposes significant restrictions on the claimant’s ability to perform basic work activities. Id. § 404.1520(c). If the claimant does not have a severe impairment or combination of impairments meeting the durational requirements, the analysis concludes with a finding of “not disabled.” If the claimant does, the ALJ continues to step three. ... The ALJ then proceeds to step four and determines whether the claimant’s RFC permits him or her to perform the requirements of his or her past relevant work. 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520(f). If the claimant can perform such requirements, then he or she is not disabled. Id.

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

Cavaggioni v. Saul · filed 2019-09-18

The Commissioner uses a five-step process, set forth in 20 C.F.R. sections 404.1520 and 416.920, to evaluate disability insurance and SSI disability claims. ... At step three of the disability analysis, the ALJ must determine if plaintiff suffers from a listed impairment. See 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1520, 416.920.

Section 404.1520 requires the ALJ to assess impairment severity at step two, determine at step three whether the impairment meets or equals a listed impairment, and assess residual functional capacity if it does not.

WHEELER v. SAUL · filed 2019-09-20(a)(4)(ii), (a)(4)(iii), (e)

Steps two and three of the ALJ’s five-step sequential evaluation process are at the heart of Wheeler’s challenge. As the regulations provide, in relevant part, an ALJ considers at step two “the medical severity of [the claimant’s] impairment(s).” 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520(a)(4)(ii). A severe impairment “significantly limits [the claimant’s] physical or mental ability to do basic work activities”. 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520(c). At step three, the ALJ “also consider[s] the medical severity of [the claimant’s] impairment(s).” 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520(a)(4)(iii). If the claimant has “an impairment(s) that meets or equals one of [the] listings in appendix 1 of [subpart P] and meets the duration requirement”, the claimant will be found disabled. Id. If the claimant’s “impairment(s) does not meet or equal a listed impairment, [the ALJ] will assess and make a finding about [the claimant’s] residual functional capacity”. 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520(e).

Section 404.1520 requires disability claims to be evaluated through a five-step sequence, and the ALJ need not proceed to later steps when a claim fails at an earlier one.

Mosley v. Saul · filed 2019-09-25

The disability determination is based on a five-step sequential evaluation process as set forth in 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1520 and 416.920 under which the ALJ is to evaluate a claim: The claimant (1) must not be engaged in “substantial gainful activity,” i.e., currently working; and (2) must have a “severe” impairment that (3) meets or exceeds [in severity] the “listings” of specified impairments, or is otherwise incapacitating to the extent that the claimant does not possess the residual functional capacity to (4) perform ... past work or (5) any other work. Albright v. Comm’r of the SSA, 174 F.3d 473, 475 n.2 (4th Cir. 1999). “If an applicant’s claim fails at any step of the process, the ALJ need not advance to the subsequent steps.” Pass v. Chater, 65 F.3d 1200, 1203 (4th Cir. 1995) (citation omitted).

Section 404.1520 establishes a five-step sequential process for disability determinations, followed in order, and the evaluation stops when a claimant is found not disabled at a step.

Secor v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2019-09-24

The Social Security Administration has established a five-step sequential evaluation process for making disability determinations. See 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1520, 416.920. The steps are followed in order: if it is determined that the claimant is not disabled at a step of the evaluation process, the evaluation will not progress to the next step.

Section 404.1520 requires disability claims to be evaluated through a sequential process, ending with whether the claimant can perform other work in the national economy.

Silas v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2019-09-26(a), (g)

These regulations establish a “sequential evaluation process” to determine whether a claimant is disabled. 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1520, 416.920. If an individual is found disabled at any point in the sequential review, further inquiry is unnecessary. 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1520(a), 416.920(a). Under this process, the ALJ must determine, in sequence, the following: whether the claimant is currently engaged in substantial gainful activity; whether the claimant has a severe impairment, i.e., one that significantly limits the ability to perform work-related functions; whether the severe impairment meets or equals the medical criteria of 20 C.F.R. Part 404 Subpart P, Appendix 1; and whether the claimant can perform his or her past relevant work. If the claimant cannot perform the tasks required of his or her prior work, step five of the evaluation requires the ALJ to decide if the claimant can do other work in the national economy in view of his or her age, education, and work experience. 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1520(a), 416.920(a). A claimant is entitled to benefits only if unable to perform other work. Bowen v. Yuckert, 482 U.S. 137, 140-42 (1987); 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1520(g), 416.920(g).

Section 404.1520(a)(4) requires the five-step disability evaluation to proceed in order and to stop once a claimant is found disabled or not disabled at a step.

Bradley v. Commissioner of Social Security Administration · filed 2019-11-20(a)(4)

Moreover, the ALJ could not do so, as the five-step evaluation process must be applied in sequence. 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520(a)(4) (“The sequential evaluation process is a series of five ‘steps’ that we follow in a set order. . . . If we can find that you are disabled or not disabled at a step, we make our determination or decision and we do not go on to the next step.” (emphasis added)).

Section 404.1520(a) establishes a five-step process for determining disability: the claimant bears the burden through steps one through four, and the burden shifts to the Commissioner at step five to show that the claimant can adjust to other work existing in significant numbers.

Ramirez v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2019-11-27(a)

The Commissioner has established a five-step sequential evaluation process for determining whether a person is disabled. 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1520(a), 416.920(a); see Bowen v. Yuckert, 482 U.S. 137, 140-42 (1987). In steps one through four, the burden of proof rests upon the claimant to establish a prima facie case of entitlement to disability benefits. ... If the claimant cannot do his past relevant work, the ALJ proceeds to step five, and the burden shifts to the Commissioner to show (1) the claimant can make an adjustment to other work, and (2) the claimant can perform specific jobs that exist in the national economy. ... If the claimant cannot make an adjustment to other work in the national economy, he is found “disabled.”. 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1520(a)(4)(v), 416.920(a)(4)(v).

Section 404.1520 places the burden on the Commissioner at Step 5 to show that a claimant can perform other work, while the claimant bears the burden at Step 3 to prove that an impairment meets or equals a listing.

RICHARDSON v. SOCIAL SECURITY ADMINISTRATION COMMISSIONER · filed 2019-12-26(g), (d)

The ALJ reached Step 5 of the sequential evaluation process, at which stage the burden of proof shifts to the commissioner to show that a claimant can perform work other than her past relevant work. 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520(g); Bowen v. Yuckert, 482 U.S. 137, 146 n.5 (1987); Goodermote, 690 F.2d at 7. ... The statement of errors also implicates Step 3 of the sequential evaluation process, at which step a claimant bears the burden of proving that her impairment or combination of impairments meets or equals a listing. 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520(d); Dudley v. Sec’y of Health & Human Servs., 816 F.2d 792, 793 (1st Cir. 1987).

Section 404.1520(a)(4)(iv) provides that a claimant is not disabled at step four if the claimant can perform past relevant work, so the sequential analysis need not proceed to step five.

Eck v. Commissioner Social Security Administration · filed 2020-01-17(a)(4)(iv) (a)(4)(v)

4. Can the claimant perform his or her “past relevant work” with this RFC assessment? If so, then the claimant is not disabled. 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1520(a)(4)(iv), 416.920(a)(4)(iv). If the claimant cannot perform his or her past relevant work, the analysis proceeds to step five. ... And because the ALJ determined that Plaintiff was able to perform past relevant work, there was no need to conduct the analysis at step five.

Section 404.1520(a) requires disability claims to be evaluated through five sequential steps, with the claimant bearing the burden through step four and the Commissioner at step five.

Garcia v. Saul · filed 2020-01-23(a)

The Commissioner has established a five-step sequential evaluation process for determining whether a person is disabled. 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1520(a), 416.920(a); Bowen v. Yuckert, 482 U.S. 137, 140-142 (1987). In steps one through four, the burden of proof rests upon the claimant to establish a prima facie case of entitlement to disability benefits. Tackett, 180 F.3d at 1098-1099. This burden is met once a claimant establishes that a physical or mental impairment prevents the claimant from engaging in past relevant work. 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1520(a)(4), 416.920(a)(4). If a claimant cannot perform past relevant work, the ALJ proceeds to step five, and the burden shifts to the Commissioner to show (1) the claimant can make an adjustment to other work; and (2) the claimant can perform specific jobs that exist in the national economy. Batson v. Comm’r of Soc. Sec. Admin., 359 F.3d 1190, 1193-94 (9th Cir. 2004). If a claimant cannot make an adjustment to other work in the national economy, the claimant will be found disabled. 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1520(a)(4)(v), 416.920(a)(4)(v).

Section 404.1520 requires the ALJ to evaluate disability sequentially and, at step three and later steps, assess the combined effects of the claimant’s impairments.

PALADINO v. COMMISSIONER OF SOCIAL SECURITY · filed 2020-01-31(a)(4)(iii)

Indeed, by failing to sufficiently consider Plaintiff’s obesity in combination with Plaintiff’s other impairments, the ALJ committed error, and the case must be remanded so the ALJ can analyze the combined effects of these impairments. ... Thus, on remand, the ALJ must conduct that required analysis of Plaintiff’s obesity combined with her other impairments at step three, and at subsequent steps.

Section 404.1520 establishes a sequential evaluation for disability claims, and at step two an ALJ need not identify every severe impairment when at least one severe impairment has been found.

Pedrero v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2020-02-05(a)

These regulations establish a “sequential evaluation process” to determine whether a claimant is disabled. 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1520, 416.920. If an individual is found disabled at any point in the sequential review, further inquiry is unnecessary. 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1520(a), 416.920(a). Under this process, the ALJ must determine, in sequence, the following: whether the claimant is currently engaged in substantial gainful activity; whether the claimant has a severe impairment, i.e., one that significantly limits the ability to perform work-related functions; whether the severe impairment meets or equals the medical criteria of 20 C.F.R. Part 404 Subpart P, Appendix 1; and whether the claimant can perform his or her past relevant work. If the claimant cannot perform the tasks required of his or her prior work, step five of the evaluation requires the ALJ to decide if the claimant can do other work in the national economy in view of his or her age, education, and work experience. 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1520(a), 416.920(a). ... To the extent that Plaintiff complains that the ALJ erred by not finding his peripheral artery disease, venous insufficiency, varicose veins, and edema to be a severe impairment at step two, there was no error committed because the ALJ found other severe impairments and such a finding is sufficient at that stage of the evaluation.

Section 404.1520 requires a five-step sequential disability analysis, and the claim ends when disability or non-disability is found at any step.

Overcash v. Saul · filed 2020-03-06(a)(4)

The Commissioner must perform a five-step analysis to determine whether a particular claimant has met his burden of establishing disability. See 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1520, 416.920; Plummer vy. 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. See 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1520(a)(4), 416.920(a)(4)(i).

Section 404.1520(a)(4) requires the Commissioner to determine disability through a sequential process, including whether the claimant can perform past relevant work and, if not, other work in the national economy considering residual functional capacity, age, education, and work experience.

Horton v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2020-03-18(a)(4)

These regulations establish a “sequential evaluation process” to determine whether a claimant is disabled. See 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520. If an individual is found disabled at any point in the sequential review, further inquiry is unnecessary. 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520(a)(4). Under this process, the Commissioner must determine, in sequence, the following: (1) whether the claimant is currently engaged in substantial gainful activity; (2) whether the claimant has a severe impairment(s) (i.e., one that significantly limits his ability to perform work-related functions); (3) whether the severe impairment meets or equals the medical criteria of Appendix 1, 20 C.F.R. Part 404, Subpart P; (4) considering the Commissioner’s determination of claimant’s RFC, whether the claimant can perform his past relevant work; and (5) if the claimant cannot perform the tasks required of his prior work, the ALJ must decide if the claimant can do other work in the national economy in view of his RFC, age, education, and work experience. 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520(a)(4).

Section 404.1520 requires the Commissioner to evaluate disability claims in five ordered steps and stop if a claimant is conclusively found disabled or not disabled at an earlier step.

Osborne v. Berryhill · filed 2020-03-19(a)(4)

The Commissioner uses a five-step process in evaluating DIB and SSI claims. See 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1520, 416.920 (2019). See also Heckler v. Campbell, 461 U.S. 458, 460-62 (1983); Hall v. Harris, 658 F.2d 260, 264-65 (4th Cir. 1981). This process requires the Commissioner to consider, in order, whether a claimant 1) is working; 2) has a severe impairment; 3) has an impairment that meets or equals the requirements of a listed impairment; 4) can return to his past relevant work; and 5) if not, whether he can perform other work. See 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1520, 416.920. If the Commissioner finds conclusively that a claimant is or is not disabled at any point in this process, review does not proceed to the next step. See 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1520(a)(4), 416.920(a)(4) (2019).

Section 404.1520(a)(4) requires the ALJ to assess a claimant’s residual functional capacity before moving from step three to step four in the sequential disability evaluation.

Martinez v. Social Security Administration · filed 2020-03-19(a)(4)

Before performing the step four analysis, in which the ALJ considers whether a claimant can perform past work, the ALJ must first determine the claimant’s RFC.

Section 404.1520(c) requires the ALJ to determine at step two whether an impairment significantly limits basic work activities, while subsection (d) requires evaluating at step three whether the impairment meets or medically equals a listed impairment.

Lord v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2020-03-24(c), (d)

At step two of the sequential evaluation process, the ALJ must determine whether the plaintiff has a severe impairment that significantly limits his physical or mental ability to do basic work activities. See 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1520(c), 416.920(c). ... At step three of the disability analysis, the ALJ examines whether a claimant’s impairment meets or medically equals the criteria of a Listings impairment. 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1520(d); 416.920(d).

Section 404.1520 requires disability claims to be evaluated through a five-step sequential process, and a severe impairment finding at step two does not by itself preclude a later work-capacity finding.

Carter v. Saul · filed 2020-03-30(a)

A finding that an impairment is “severe” means that the impairment “cause[s] more than minimal limitations in the claimant’s ability to perform basic work activities,” (Tr. at 50), and this finding is relevant at step two of the sequential evaluation process. See 42 U.S.C. §§ 404.1520(a)-(g). Finding that claimant suffers from a severe impairment in her arm does not prohibit a determination at step four that claimant is able to perform frequent reaching with that same arm.

Section 404.1520 establishes a five-step sequential process for deciding disability claims, and a claimant qualifies for benefits only if unable to perform other work after that evaluation.

Caballero v. Commissioner of Social Security Administration · filed 2020-04-09(a)(4), (f)

The Social Security Administration has promulgated regulations that establish a “sequential evaluation process” to determine if a claimant is disabled. See 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520. If an individual is found disabled at any point in the sequential review, further inquiry is unnecessary. 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520(a)(4). 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(s) (i.e., one that significantly limits her ability to perform work-related functions); (3) whether the severe impairment meets or equals the medical criteria of Appendix 1, 20 C.F.R. Part 404, Subpart P; (4) considering the Commissioner’s determination of claimant’s RFC, whether the claimant can perform her past relevant work; and (5) if the claimant cannot perform the tasks required of her prior work, the ALJ must decide if the claimant can do other work in the national economy in view of her RFC, age, education, and work experience. 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520(a)(4). A claimant is entitled to benefits only if unable to perform other work. See Bowen v. Yuckert, 482 U.S. 137, 142 (1987); 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520(f), (g).

Section 404.1520 establishes a five-step disability-evaluation process and requires the ALJ at step two to determine whether the claimant has a medically determinable severe impairment.

Deal v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2020-04-28(a)(4)(ii)

At step two of the sequential evaluation process, the ALJ must determine whether the claimant has any medically determinable severe impairments. 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1520(a)(ii), 416.920(a)(ii). ... The Court finds the ALJ’s analysis to be supported by substantial evidence. ... The Court finds the ALJ did not err in finding fibromyalgia to not be a medically determinable impairment.

The sequential-evaluation rule makes the twelve-month duration requirement relevant at Step Two when determining whether an impairment or combination is severe.

Weber v. Commissioner Social Security Administration · filed 2020-05-04(a)(4)(ii)

The "twelve-month duration" requirement is only relevant at Step Two when the ALJ determines whether a claimant has an impairment or combination of impairments that is “severe” and expected to last a continuous period of at least twelve months. 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1509, 404.1520(a)(4)(ii). Here the ALJ resolved Step Two in Plaintiff's favor, and, therefore, the ALJ’s application of the "twelve-month duration" requirement to evaluate Plaintiff’s specific symptoms for the purpose of determining disability was in error.

Section 404.1520 requires the ALJ to evaluate disability claims through a five-step sequential process addressing substantial gainful activity, severe impairment, listed impairments, past relevant work, and other work in light of the claimant's residual functional capacity.

Lutz-Stoker v. Saul · filed 2020-05-08(a)(4)

In making this determination at the administrative level, the ALJ follows a five-step sequential evaluation process. 20 C.F.R. §§404.1520(a), 416.920(a). Under this process, the ALJ must sequentially determine: (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 his or her past relevant work; and (5) whether the claimant is able to do any other work, considering his or her age, education, work experience, and RFC. 20 C.F.R. §§404.1520(a)(4), 416.920(a)(4).

Section 404.1520 requires the ALJ to follow the sequential evaluation process, including assessing severity at step two and comparing impairments with the Listings at step three; if a Listing is met or equaled, the claimant is considered disabled without proceeding to later steps.

Turner v. Berryhill · filed 2020-05-18(a)(4)(ii), (a)(4)(iii), and (d)

The second step requires the ALJ to determine whether the claimant has a medically determinable impairment, or combination of impairments, that is severe and meets the duration requirement. See 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1520(a)(4)(ii), 416.920(a)(4)(ii). ... The third step requires the ALJ to determine the medical severity of any impairments; that is, whether the claimant’s impairments meet or equal a listed impairment under 20 C.F.R. Part 404, Subpart P, Appendix 1. See 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1520(a)(4)(iii), 416.920(a)(4)(iii). ... If the answer is yes, the claimant is considered disabled under the Social Security Act and benefits are awarded. See 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1520(d), 416.920(d). ... A failure to recognize an impairment at step two may be harmless if that impairment and its matching limitations are folded into the latter steps of the sequential process. But by not identifying Petitioner’s congestive heart failure as a severe impairment at step two, the ALJ necessarily did not measure Petitioner’s congestive heart failure against Listing 4.02 at step three. If he had done so, and if Petitioner’s congestive heart failure met or equaled Listing 4.02, then Petitioner is disabled under the Social Security Act and entitled to benefits (without reaching steps four and five).

Section 404.1520(a)(4) requires the disability evaluation to proceed through each sequential step unless an earlier determination establishes that the claimant is or is not disabled.

GONZALEZ v. COMMISSIONER OF SOCIAL SECURITY · filed 2020-05-28(a)(4)

The evaluation continues through each step unless it is determined at any point that the plaintiff is or is not disabled. 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1520(a)(4), 416.920(a)(4).

Section 404.1520(a)(4) establishes a sequential disability evaluation in which a claimant who can perform past relevant work at Step Four is not evaluated at Step Five.

Jones v. Comm'r of Soc. Sec. · filed 2020-06-03(a)(4)

A “five-step sequential evaluation process” guides efforts to implement these two requirements. 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520 (authorized by 42 U.S.C. § 405(a)); ... If (4) she has held a job that someone with her residual functional capacity can still do or if (5) someone of her age, education, work experience, and residual functional capacity can adjust to other work available in the national economy, then she is not disabled. Id. §§ 404.1520(a)(4), 416.920(a)(4). ... Because Jones can perform his past relevant work, the ALJ was not required to proceed to Step Five.

Section 404.1520(a)(4) establishes a sequential disability evaluation considering work activity, impairment severity, residual functional capacity, and vocational factors.

Bolek v. Kijakazi · filed 2020-06-19(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 RFC and his or her age, education, and work experience. Id.

Section 404.1520(a)(4) requires disability claims to be evaluated through a sequential process addressing work activity, impairment severity, residual functional capacity, and vocational factors, with burdens allocated across the steps.

Bolek v. Kijakazi · filed 2020-06-19(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 RFC and his or her age, education, and work experience. ... 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 that the claimant can perform. See Jones v. Astrue, 619 F.3d 963, 971 (8th Cir. 2010) (citing Reed v. Sullivan, 988 F.2d 812, 815-16 (8th Cir. 1993)). ... Whether the ALJ erred in his determination does not matter as the Court finds Bolek disabled at step four of the sequential analysis.

Section 404.1520 requires the ALJ to use a five-step sequential process to decide disability, including assessing substantial gainful activity, impairment severity, listed impairments, past relevant work, and the claimant's ability to perform other work.

Bower v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2020-07-16(a)(4)(i)-(v)

In evaluating the evidence presented at an administrative hearing, the ALJ must follow a sequential process in determining whether a person is disabled in general (see 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1520, 416.920) – or continues to be disabled (see 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1594, 416.994) – within the meaning of the Social Security Act. The first step requires the ALJ to determine whether the claimant is engaged in substantial gainful activity (“SGA”). ... The second step requires the ALJ to determine whether the claimant has a medically determinable impairment, or combination of impairments, that is severe and meets the duration requirement. ... The third step requires the ALJ to determine the medical severity of any impairments; that is, whether the claimant’s impairments meet or equal a listed impairment under 20 C.F.R. Part 404, Subpart P, Appendix 1. ... The fourth step of the evaluation process requires the ALJ to determine whether the claimant’s residual functional capacity (“RFC”) is sufficient for the claimant to perform past relevant work. ... In the fifth and final step, if it has been established that a claimant can no longer perform past relevant work because of his impairments, the burden shifts to the Commissioner to show that the claimant retains the ability to do alternate work and to demonstrate that such alternate work exists in significant numbers in the national economy.

Section 404.1520(c) requires the ALJ to determine whether the claimant has a medically determinable severe impairment or combination of impairments, and section 404.1520(a)(4)(iv) requires comparison of the claimant’s past relevant work with the claimant’s RFC at step four.

Freeman v. Saul · filed 2020-07-30(c), (a)(4)(iv)

At step two, the ALJ must decide whether the claimant suffers from any medically determinable severe impairments or a combination of impairments that is severe. 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520(c). ... At step four, the ALJ must compare the demands of the claimant’s past relevant work to the claimant’s RFC. 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520(a)(4)(iv).

Section 404.1520 requires a five-step disability evaluation, under which a listed impairment is conclusively disabling and an unlisted impairment proceeds to the past-relevant-work inquiry.

Gonzales v. Social Security Administration · filed 2020-07-31(a)(4)(i), (d), (e)

At step three, the ALJ “asks whether any ‘medically severe impairment,’ alone or in combination with other impairments, is equivalent to any of a number of listed impairments so severe as to preclude ‘substantial gainful employment.’” Fischer-Ross v. Barnhart, 431 F.3d 729, 731 (10th Cir. 2005) (quoting 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1525–404.1526 & pt. 404, subpt. P, App. 1). “If listed, the impairment is conclusively presumed disabling.” Id. (citing 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520(d)). “If unlisted, the claimant must establish at step four that [his] impairment prevents [him] from performing work [he] has previously performed.” Id. (citing 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520(e), (f)).

Section 404.1520 establishes a sequential evaluation process for determining disability: the ALJ proceeds through the listed steps, and benefits are available only if the claimant cannot perform other work.

McBroom v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2020-09-03(a), (g)

The Social Security Administration, in order to regularize the adjudicative process, promulgated the detailed regulations currently in effect. These regulations establish a “sequential evaluation process” to determine whether a claimant is disabled. 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520. If an individual is found disabled at any point in the sequential review, further inquiry is unnecessary. 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520(a). Under this process, the ALJ must determine, in sequence, the following: whether the claimant is currently engaged in substantial gainful activity; whether the claimant has a severe impairment, i.e., one that significantly limits the ability to perform work-related functions; whether the severe impairment meets or equals the medical criteria of 20 C.F.R. Part 404 Subpart P, Appendix 1; and whether the claimant can perform his or her past relevant work. If the claimant cannot perform the tasks required of his or her prior work, step five of the evaluation requires the ALJ to decide if the claimant can do other work in the national economy in view of his or her age, education, and work experience. 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520(a). A claimant is entitled to benefits only if unable to perform other work. Bowen v. Yuckert, 482 U.S. 137, 140-42 (1987); 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520(g).

Section 404.1520 establishes a sequential evaluation process for determining disability; if a claimant is found disabled at any step, evaluation ends, and benefits are available only if the claimant cannot perform other work at step five.

Harris v. Commissioner of Social Security Administration · filed 2020-09-24(a), (g)

The Social Security Administration, in order to regularize the adjudicative process, promulgated the detailed regulations currently in effect. These regulations establish a “sequential evaluation process” to determine whether a claimant is disabled. 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1520, 416.920. If an individual is found disabled at any point in the sequential review, further inquiry is unnecessary. 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1520(a), 416.920(a). Under this process, the ALJ must determine, in sequence, the following: whether the claimant is currently engaged in substantial gainful activity; whether the claimant has a severe impairment, i.e., one that significantly limits the ability to perform work-related functions; whether the severe impairment meets or equals the medical criteria of 20 C.F.R. Part 404 Subpart P, Appendix 1; and whether the claimant can perform his or her past relevant work. If the claimant cannot perform the tasks required of his or her prior work, step five of the evaluation requires the ALJ to decide if the claimant can do other work in the national economy in view of his or her age, education, and work experience. 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1520(a), 416.920(a). A claimant is entitled to benefits only if unable to perform other work. Bowen v. Yuckert, 482 U.S. 137, 140-42 (1987); 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1520(g), 416.920(g).

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

Staton v. Social Security Administration, Commissioner · filed 2020-09-25

To make this determination, the Commissioner employs a five-step, sequential evaluation process: (1) Is the person presently employed? (2) Is the person’s impairment severe? (3) Does the person’s impairment meet or equal one of the specific impairments set forth in 20 C.F.R. Pt. 404, Subpt. P, App. 1? (4) Is the person unable to perform his or her former occupation? (5) Is the person unable to perform any other work within the economy? McDaniel v. Bowen, 800 F.2d 1026, 1030 (11th Cir. 1986)2; 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1520, 416.920; see also Taylor v. Acting Comm'r of Soc. Sec. Admin., 761 F. App'x 966, 967 (11th Cir. 2019). ... Because the ALJ fails to mention or discuss the claimant’s 2009 MRI findings, and those MRI findings contradict the ALJ’s conclusion that the claimant’s allegations of neck and back pain “are not supported by formal diagnoses in the record,” the court finds that substantial evidence does not support the ALJ’s ultimate determination that the claimant’s neck and back pain do not constitute severe impairments at step two.

Section 404.1520(a) requires disability claims to be evaluated through a five-step sequential process, including determining severity, listing-level equivalence, past relevant work, and other work in the national economy.

HILL v. BERRYHILL · filed 2020-10-19(a)

The Commissioner has provided the ALJ with a five-step sequential analysis to use when evaluating the disabled status of each claimant. 20 C.F.R. §404.1520(a). The ALJ must determine: (1) whether the claimant is currently engaged in substantial gainful activity; (2) if not, whether the claimant has a severe impairment; (3) if the claimant has a severe impairment, whether it meets or equals the criteria listed in 20 C.F.R., pt. 404, subpt. P., appx. 1; (4) if the impairment does not satisfy one of the impairment listings, whether the claimant’s impairments prevent him from performing his past relevant work; and (5) if the claimant is incapable of performing his past relevant work, whether he can perform any other work which exists in the national economy, in light of his age, education, work experience and residual functional capacity. 20 C.F.R. §404.1520. The claimant carries the initial burden of demonstrating by medical evidence that he is unable to return to his previous employment (steps 1-4). Dobrowolsky, 606 F.2d at 406. Once the claimant meets this burden, the burden of proof shifts to the Commissioner to show that the claimant can engage in alternative substantial gainful activity (step 5). Id.

Section 404.1520 establishes a five-step sequential process for deciding disability and ends the inquiry when the claimant is found not disabled at any step.

Garcia v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2020-11-03(a)(1), (a)(4)

Social Security regulations outline a five-step, sequential evaluation process to determine whether a claimant is disabled. See 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520(a)(1). The ALJ must evaluate whether: (1) the claimant engaged in substantial gainful activity; (2) the claimant has a severe impairment; (3) the severe impairment meets or equals an impairment in the Listing of Impairments; (4) the claimant has the RFC to perform past relevant work; and (5) in light of the claimant’s RFC, age, education, and work experience, there are other jobs the claimant can perform. ... If the ALJ determines that the claimant is not disabled at any step of the evaluation process, the inquiry ends. 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1520(a)(4), 416.920(a)(4).

Section 404.1520(a)(4) requires disability to be decided through the sequential evaluation process, including determining at step two whether the claimant has a medically determinable severe impairment.

Montgomery v. Saul · filed 2020-11-10(a)(4)

At step two of the sequential evaluation process, the ALJ must determine whether the claimant has any medically determinable severe impairments. 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1520(a)(ii), 416.920(a)(ii). ... The Court finds any error is harmless. Step two was resolved in Plaintiff’s favor, and Plaintiff fails to identify any credited limitation associated with the identified conditions that was not considered by the ALJ and incorporated into the RFC at step four. ... The ALJ limited Plaintiff to no more than light level work and found her capable of performing both light and sedentary jobs at step five. Tr. 22, 26-27. ... Therefore, any error in not identifying these conditions as severe was harmless at most.

Section 404.1520(a) requires a five-step disability evaluation, and an ALJ need not discuss step-three listing equivalence when the claimant presents no evidence or theory supporting it.

Moreno v. Commissioner of Social Security Administration · filed 2020-11-12(a)

To determine whether a claimant is disabled for purposes of the Social Security Act, the ALJ follows a five-step process. 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520(a). ... 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. pt. 404 (“Listings”). § 404.1520(a)(4)(iii). If so, the claimant is disabled. Id. If not, the ALJ proceeds to step four. ... The transcript of the June 2018 hearing before the ALJ, as well as Plaintiff’s counsel’s December 2018 brief to the Appeals Council, show that Plaintiff never presented a Listing argument to the ALJ or Appeals Council. ... Plaintiff’s failure to mention – let alone advance any theory – before the ALJ or Appeals Council about why her impairments met or equaled a Listing means that the ALJ was not required to discuss the issue in her report.

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

Allison v. Social Security Administration · filed 2020-11-16(a)(4)

When considering a disability application, the Commissioner is required to use a five-step sequential evaluation process. 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1520, 416.920; Bowen v. Yuckert, 482 U.S. 137, 140 (1987). At the first four steps of the evaluation process, the claimant must show: (1) the claimant is not engaged in “substantial gainful activity;” (2) the claimant has a “severe medically determinable . . . impairment . . . or a combination of impairments” that has lasted or is expected to last for at least one year; and (3) the impairment(s) either meet or equal one of the Listings2 of presumptively disabling impairments; or (4) the claimant is unable to perform his or her “past relevant work.” 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1520(a)(4)(i–iv), 416.920(a)(4)(i–iv); Grogan, 399 F.3d at 1261. If the claimant cannot show that his or her impairment meets or equals a Listing but proves that he or she is unable to perform his or her “past relevant work,” the burden then shifts to the Commissioner, at step five, to show that the claimant is able to perform other work in the national economy, considering the claimant’s residual functional capacity (“RFC”), age, education, and work experience. Id.

Section 404.1520(d) requires the ALJ to determine at step three whether the claimant’s impairment meets or equals a listed impairment, while § 404.1520(a)(4)(iv) addresses at step four whether the claimant can perform past relevant work based on residual functional capacity.

Sharbrough v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2020-11-30(d), (a)(4)(iv)

At step three, the ALJ determines if a claimant's impairment meets or equals an impairment listed in Appendix 1 to Subpart P of Regulation Nos. 4. ... If a claimant meets or equals a listed impairment, then he or she will be found disabled at step three of the sequential process without further inquiry. See 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520(d). ... At the fourth step in the sequential process, the ALJ determines whether the impairment prevents the claimant from performing work which the claimant performed in the past, i.e., whether the claimant has sufficient residual functional capacity to tolerate the demands of any past relevant work. 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1520(a)(4)(iv); 416.920(a)(4)(iv).

Section 404.1520(a) requires disability claims to be evaluated through a five-step sequential process, including a step-two determination of whether the claimant has a severe impairment; the court upheld denial at step two because no evidence established a severe impairment.

Medina v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2020-11-30(a)

In holding that Medina was disabled, the ALJ followed the five-step sequential process for making disability determinations, which is prescribed in 20 CFR §§ 404.1520(a) and 416.920(a). ... After considering the evidence attached to Murray’s First Letter and the evidence provided by Medina, there was still no evidence of any medical impairments, much less severe medical impairments. Accordingly, the Appeals Council correctly held that Medina’s SSDI claim failed at the second step of the five-step analysis. Since the Appeals Council applied the correct legal principles and since its conclusions were supported by substantial evidence, its redetermination to terminate Medina’s entitlement to SSDI benefits is affirmed.

Section 404.1520 requires disability claims to be evaluated through a sequential process that addresses substantial gainful activity, severe impairment, residual functional capacity and past relevant work, and the ability to perform other work in the national economy.

AELING v. COMMISSIONER OF SOCIAL SECURITY · filed 2020-12-30(b), (c), (e), and (g)

The Social Security Act establishes a five-step sequential evaluation process for determining whether a plaintiff is disabled within the meaning of the statute. 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1520(a)(4), 416.920(a)(4). ... At step one, the ALJ determines whether the plaintiff is currently engaged in substantial gainful activity. 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1520(b), 416.920(b). If so, then the inquiry ends because the plaintiff is not disabled. ... At step two, the ALJ decides whether the plaintiff has a “severe impairment” or combination of impairments that “significantly limits [the plaintiff’s] physical or mental ability to do basic work activities[.]” 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1520(c), 416.920(c). ... At step four, the ALJ must determine the plaintiff’s residual functional capacity (“RFC”) and determine whether the plaintiff can perform past relevant work. 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1520(e), (f), 416.920(e), (f). If the plaintiff can perform past relevant work, then the inquiry ends because the plaintiff is not disabled. Otherwise, the ALJ proceeds to the final step. At step five, the ALJ must decide whether the plaintiff, considering the plaintiff’s RFC, age, education, and work experience, can perform other jobs that exist in significant numbers in the national economy. 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1520(g), 416.920(g). If the ALJ determines that the plaintiff can do so, then the plaintiff is not disabled. Otherwise, the plaintiff is presumed to be disabled if the impairment or combination of impairments has lasted or is expected to last for a continuous period of at least twelve months.

Section 404.1520 sets out the typical five-step analysis for determining disability, and mental-impairment claims also require a special technique at steps two and three.

Abramaitys v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2021-01-07

When evaluating alleged mental health impairments, 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.

Section 404.1520 requires disability claims to be evaluated through sequential steps addressing substantial gainful activity, severe impairment, residual functional capacity and past relevant work, and the ability to perform other work in the national economy.

MARTINEZ v. COMMISSIONER OF SOCIAL SECURITY · filed 2021-02-08(b), (c), (e), (g)

The Social Security Act establishes a five-step sequential evaluation process for determining whether a plaintiff is disabled within the meaning of the statute. ... At step one, the ALJ determines whether the plaintiff is currently engaged in substantial gainful activity. 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1520(b), 416.920(b). If so, then the inquiry ends because the plaintiff is not disabled. ... At step two, the ALJ decides whether the plaintiff has a “severe impairment” or combination of impairments that “significantly limits [the plaintiff’s] physical or mental ability to do basic work activities[.]” 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1520(c), 416.920(c). If the plaintiff does not have a severe impairment or combination of impairments, then the inquiry ends because the plaintiff is not disabled. Otherwise, the ALJ proceeds to step three. ... At step four, the ALJ must determine the plaintiff’s residual functional capacity (“RFC”) and determine whether the plaintiff can perform past relevant work. 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1520(e), (f), 416.920(e), (f). If the plaintiff can perform past relevant work, then the inquiry ends because the plaintiff is not disabled. Otherwise, the ALJ proceeds to the final step. ... At step five, the ALJ must decide whether the plaintiff, considering the plaintiff’s RFC, age, education, and work experience, can perform other jobs that exist in significant numbers in the national economy. 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1520(g), 416.920(g). If the ALJ determines that the plaintiff can do so, then the plaintiff is not disabled. Otherwise, the plaintiff is presumed to be disabled if the impairment or combination of impairments has lasted or is expected to last for a continuous period of at least twelve months.

Section 404.1520(a)(4) permits the disability determination to end at a step once the Commissioner finds the claimant disabled or not disabled, without proceeding to later steps.

Maxfield v. Saul · filed 2021-02-09(a)(4)

But because substantial evidence supported the ALJ’s finding (that Plaintiff’s only medically determinable impairment is his polysubstance use disorder) at step two of the sequential analysis, this Court need not proceed to address whether the ALJ erred later in the sequential analysis. See Tackett v. Apfel, 180 F.3d 1094, 1098 (9th Cir. 1999) (citing 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520(a)(4) (“If [the Commissioner] can find that you are disabled or not disabled at a step, we make our determination or decision and we do not go on to the next step.”)).

Section 404.1520 requires the ALJ to consider at step two whether a claimant has a medically determinable impairment before evaluating its severity and disability through the sequential process.

Buzzo v. Social Security Administration, Commissioner of · filed 2021-03-11(a)(4)(ii)

At step two, the ALJ is required to consider whether Plaintiff’s alleged impairments constitute “medically determinable” impairments. See 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1508; 416.920(a)(4)(ii); 404.1520(a)(4)(ii). ... Accordingly, the Court finds that the ALJ committed reversible error by failing to consider the limitations caused by Plaintiff’s nonsevere impairment (migraine headaches) in the RFC determination.

Section 404.1520 establishes a sequential evaluation process in which the evaluator proceeds through the steps in order; at step two, a non-severe impairment or combination that also fails the duration requirement results in a finding of not disabled.

Abernathy v. Social Security Administration, Commissioner · filed 2021-03-23(a)(4)

The Social Security Administration has established a five-step sequential evaluation process for determining whether an individual is disabled and thus eligible for DIB or SSI. See 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1520, 416.920; see also Doughty v. Apfel, 245 F.3d 1274, 1278 (11th Cir. 2001). 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. See 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1520(a)(4), 416.920(a)(4). ... An individual impairment or combination of impairments that is not classified as “severe” and does not satisfy the durational requirements set forth in 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1509 and 416.909 will result in a finding of not disabled. See 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1520(a)(4)(ii), 416.920(a)(4)(ii).

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

Eggar v. Commissioner, Social Security Administration · filed 2021-05-03

The Social Security Administration regulations provide a five-step sequential evaluation process for determining whether a claimant is disabled. Bustamante v. Massanari, 262 F.3d 949, 953-954 (9th Cir. 2001); 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1520, 416.920. The claimant bears the burden of proof under steps one through four. Bustamante, 262 F.3d at 954. The Commissioner bears the burden of proof under step five. Id.

Section 404.1520 guides disability determinations through a five-step sequential evaluation, shifting the burden to the agency at Step 5 to show that other work exists in significant numbers.

Hudson v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2021-05-25

In considering an application for supplemental security income or for disability benefits, the Social Security Agency is guided by the following sequential benefits analysis: at Step 1, the Commissioner asks if the claimant is still performing substantial gainful activity; at Step 2, the Commissioner determines if one or more of the claimant’s impairments are “severe;” at Step 3, the Commissioner analyzes whether the claimant’s impairments, singly or in combination, meet or equal a Listing in the Listing of Impairments; at Step 4, the Commissioner determines whether or not the claimant can still perform his or her past relevant work; and finally, at Step 5, if it is established that claimant can no longer perform his or her past relevant work, the burden of proof shifts to the agency to determine whether a significant number of other jobs which the claimant can perform exist in the national economy. See Combs v. Com’r of Soc. Sec., 459 F.3d 640, 643 (6th Cir. 2006); 20 C.F.R. §§404.1520, 416.920.

Section 404.1520 requires the Commissioner to evaluate disability sequentially, including work activity, severity and duration/listing criteria, residual functional capacity and past work, and whether the claimant can perform past work.

Cress v. SSA · filed 2021-05-26(b), (d), (e), (f)

A claimant must first demonstrate that he is not engaged in substantial gainful employment at the time of the disability application. 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520(b). Second, the claimant must show that he suffers from a severe impairment or a combination of impairments. 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520(c). Third, if the claimant is not engaged in substantial gainful employment and has a severe impairment which is expected to last for at least twelve months and which meets or equals a listed impairment, he will be considered disabled without regard to age, education, and work experience. 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520(d). Fourth, if the claimant has a severe impairment but the Commissioner cannot make a determination regarding disability based on medical evaluations and current work activity, the Commissioner will review the claimant’s RFC and relevant past work to determine whether he can perform his past work. 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520(e). If he can, he is not disabled. 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520(f).

Section 404.1520's sequential evaluation generally does not require reversal for failure to classify an impairment as severe at Step 2 when the ALJ finds other severe impairments and proceeds through the remaining analysis.

Lambert v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2021-06-10

First, a failure to find a “severe” impairment at Step 2 will not usually require reversal where an ALJ has determined the existence of other severe mental impairments and progressed through the sequential analysis. 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(a)(4) ends the sequential disability inquiry once the Commissioner can find a claimant disabled or not disabled at a step.

Delesline-Meggett v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2021-06-11(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 disability claims to be evaluated through sequential steps, including assessing substantial gainful activity, severe impairments, residual functional capacity and past relevant work, and the ability to perform other work in the national economy.

EDGHILL v. COMMISSIONER OF SOCIAL SECURITY · filed 2021-06-15(b), (c), (e), (g)

The Social Security Act establishes a five-step sequential evaluation process for determining whether a plaintiff is disabled within the meaning of the statute. 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520(a)(4). ... At step one, the ALJ determines whether the plaintiff is currently engaged in substantial gainful activity. 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520(b). If so, then the inquiry ends because the plaintiff is not disabled. ... At step two, the ALJ decides whether the plaintiff has a “severe impairment” or combination of impairments that “significantly limits [the plaintiff’s] physical or mental ability to do basic work activities[.]” 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520(c). If the plaintiff does not have a severe impairment or combination of impairments, then the inquiry ends because the plaintiff is not disabled. Otherwise, the ALJ proceeds to step three. ... At step four, the ALJ must determine the plaintiff’s residual functional capacity (“RFC”) and determine whether the plaintiff can perform past relevant work. 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520(e), (f). If the plaintiff can perform past relevant work, then the inquiry ends because the plaintiff is not disabled. Otherwise, the ALJ proceeds to the final step. ... At step five, the ALJ must decide whether the plaintiff, considering the plaintiff’s RFC, age, education, and work experience, can perform other jobs that exist in significant numbers in the national economy. 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520(g). If the ALJ determines that the plaintiff can do so, then the plaintiff is not disabled. Otherwise, the plaintiff is presumed to be disabled if the impairment or combination of impairments has lasted or is expected to last for a continuous period of at least twelve months.

At step 4, the claimant bears the burden of proving inability to return to past relevant work and the Commissioner must compare the claimant’s RFC with that work; at step 5, the burden shifts to the Commissioner to show that the claimant can perform other work.

OLIVER v. SOCIAL SECURITY ADMINISTRATION COMMISSIONER · filed 2021-06-13(f), (g)

The ALJ reached Step 4 of the sequential evaluation process, at which stage the claimant bears the burden of proving inability to return to past relevant work. ... At this step, the commissioner must make findings of the plaintiff’s RFC and the physical and mental demands of past work and determine whether the plaintiff’s RFC would permit performance of that work. ... In the alternative, the ALJ reached Step 5 of the sequential evaluation process, at which stage the burden of proof shifts to the commissioner to show that a claimant can perform work other than her past relevant work.

Section 404.1520 requires disability claims to be evaluated through a five-step sequential process, including consideration of substantial gainful activity, severe impairments, Listings, past relevant work, and other work in the national economy.

Lawson v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2021-06-29

In considering an application for supplemental security income or for disability benefits, the Social Security Agency is guided by the following sequential benefits analysis: at Step 1, the Commissioner asks if the claimant is still performing substantial gainful activity; at Step 2, the Commissioner determines if one or more of the claimant’s impairments are “severe;” at Step 3, the Commissioner analyzes whether the claimant’s impairments, singly or in combination, meet or equal a Listing in the Listing of Impairments; at Step 4, the Commissioner determines whether or not the claimant can still perform his or her past relevant work; and finally, at Step 5, if it is established that claimant can no longer perform his or her past relevant work, the burden of proof shifts to the agency to determine whether a significant number of other jobs which the claimant can perform exist in the national economy. See Combs v. Commissioner of Soc. Sec., 459 F.3d 640, 643 (6th Cir. 2006); 20 C.F.R. §§404.1520, 416.920.

Section 404.1520(a)(4) requires a five-step sequential evaluation of disability claims, and the inquiry ends when disability can be decided at any step.

Whidbee v. Kijakazi · filed 2021-07-06(a)(4)

Regulations issued by the Commissioner establish a five-step sequential evaluation process to be followed in a disability case. 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1520(a)(4), 416.920(a)(4). ... Ifa decision regarding disability can be made at any step of the process the inquiry ceases. See 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1520(a)(4), 416.920(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; meeting a listed impairment at step three establishes disability.

(SS) Quidor v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2021-07-28(d), (f)

An ALJ determines eligibility for Social Security benefits in a five-step sequential evaluation process, asking: (1) whether the claimant is engaged in substantial gainful activity; (2) whether the claimant has a medical impairment (or combination of impairments) that qualifies as severe; (3) whether any of the claimant’s impairments meet or medically equal the severity of one of the impairments listed in the regulations; (4) whether the claimant can perform past relevant work; and (5) whether the claimant can perform other specified types of work. See Barnes v. Berryhill, 895 F.3d 702, 704 n.3 (9th Cir. 2018); 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1520, 416.920. The burden of proof is on the claimant during the first four steps of the inquiry but shifts to the Commissioner at the fifth step. See 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1520(f), 416.920(f); Bustamante v. Massanari, 262 F.3d 949, 953-54 (9th Cir. 2001). ... If the requirements of a condition’s listing are met, then a claimant has established disability at step three, and the ALJ’s analysis ends. See 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520(d).

Section 404.1520(a) establishes a five-step sequential process for determining disability, ending the inquiry when disability can be resolved and requiring consideration of work capacity, age, education, and work experience at the final step.

Smith v. Social Security Administration · filed 2021-08-03(a)

The Commissioner utilizes a five-step sequential evaluation process to determine whether a claimant is disabled. 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1520(a), 416.920(a). If the issue of disability can be resolved at any point during the evaluation, the ALJ does not proceed to the next step and the claim is not reviewed further. Id. First, if the claimant is engaged in substantial gainful activity, she is not disabled. Id. Second, the claimant is not disabled if she does not have a severe medically determinable impairment that meets the 12-month durational requirements. Id. Third, the claimant is presumed disabled if she suffers from a listed impairment, or its equivalent, for the proper duration. Id. Fourth, the claimant is not disabled if, based on her residual functional capacity (“RFC”), she can perform past relevant work. Id. Fifth, if the claimant can adjust to other work based on her RFC, age, education, and work experience, she is not disabled. Id.

Section 404.1520(a) requires the ALJ to consider the combined effect of all of a claimant's impairments when determining disability.

Smith v. Chater · filed 1997-01-24(a)

When a plaintiff has a combination of impairments, the ALJ is required to consider the combined effect of all impairments in making his determination of disability. 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1523, 404.1520(a).

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

Horner v. Schweiker · filed 1982-06-29(c)

In order to be entitled to an award of benefits, the burden was on Mrs. Horner to show that she suffered from a severe impairment which “ * * * significantly limited] * * * ” her physical or mental ability to do basic work activities.

Section 404.1520(c) requires an impairment to be severe before it can support a disability finding, and impairments that are not severe cannot meet a listed impairment.

Corbecky v. Heckler · filed 1984-05-29(c)

First of all, regarding plaintiff Corbecky’s obstructive lung disease, eyesight problems, and hypertension, there is no evidence whatsoever that these impairments are. even severe impairments under the definition contained in 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520(c), much less of sufficient severity to meet a listed impairment.

Section 404.1520 requires a disability claimant to show a severe impairment that significantly limits basic work-related activities.

Christine HOUSTON, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. SECRETARY OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES, Defendant-Appellee · filed 1984-06-14

Appellant was required to prove that the impairment was severe and that it significantly limited her ability to perform basic work-related tasks such as walking, standing, sitting, seeing, speaking, following directions, getting along with co-workers, etc. 20 C.F.R. Secs. 404.1520, 404.1521.