20 C.F.R. § 404.1520

Section 404.1520(c) requires the adjudicator to decide severity solely from medical evidence, without considering vocational factors, and to deny disability when the impairment is not severe.

Andrews v. Heckler · filed 1983-11-03(c)

Secondly, the AU determines, solely on the basis of medical evidence and without reference to vocational factors, whether the claimed impairment is “severe”, i.e. significantly limits ability to do basic work activities; if it is not severe, disability is denied.

Section 404.1520(c) lawfully requires a claimant to establish a severe impairment before vocational factors are considered.

Moore v. Heckler · filed 1983-11-17(c)

Therefore, the regulations, which incorporate and explicate the severity test, do not exceed the Secretary’s statutory authority.

Section 404.1520(c) imposes only a de minimis severity threshold: an impairment is non-severe only if it is so slight that it would not interfere with anyone’s basic work activities, after which the agency must continue the disability analysis under the statute.

McCullough v. Heckler · filed 1984-03-30(c)

In short the “severity” concept is nothing more than an administrative convenience. As with any other administrative regulation, it cannot supplant the focus mandated by the statute itself. It should be employed only when a claim is so groundless that any analysis of the claimant’s work experience or residual functional capacity would be a waste of time.

Section 404.1520(c) cannot deny a disability claim based solely on a non-severe impairment without considering the claimant's vocational factors and ability to perform past or other work.

Dixon v. Heckler · filed 1984-06-22(c)

The severity regulation is unlawful because it mandates the denial of claims without consideration of vocational factors.

Section 404.1520(c) places the severe-impairment determination at the second step of the sequential disability evaluation.

Seavey v. Heckler · filed 1984-09-28(c)

The Appeals Council, by finding that Plaintiff’s impairment was not severe, based its determination upon the second step in the sequential analysis set forth in the Social Security Regulations. 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520(c). The Secretary’s finding that the claimant is not suffering from a severe impairment must be reversed. The case is to be remanded to the Secretary for completion of the evaluation process to determine whether or not this claimant is disabled.

Section 404.1520(c) makes step two turn on whether the claimant has a severe impairment that significantly affects basic work-related activities; if the impairment is severe, the sequential evaluation continues.

Lorenzo v. Heckler · filed 1985-02-01(c)

If not, the second inquiry is whether the claimant suffers from a “severe” impairment which significantly affects basic work related activities. 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520(c) (1984). If so, the inquiry progresses. If not, then a finding of no disability is made. In this case the defendant Secretary found that the plaintiff does not suffer from a severe impairment, and accordingly determined that the plaintiff is not disabled within the meaning of the Social Security Act. ... As will be demonstrated below, the Secretary’s finding is not supported by substantial evidence. Therefore, the cause must be remanded for the Secretary to continue the sequential evaluation.

Section 404.1520(c) permits a finding of no severe impairment at step two only when the impairment is a slight abnormality with such minimal effect that it would not be expected to interfere with the claimant’s ability to work, without considering age, education, or work experience.

William W. STONE, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Margaret M. HECKLER, Secretary of Health & Human Services, Defendant-Appellee · filed 1985-02-15(c)

We therefore construed the current regulation as setting the following standard in determining whether a claimant’s impairment is' severe: “[A]n impairment can be considered as not severe only if it is a slight abnormality [having] such minimal effect on the individual that it would not be expected to interfere with the individual’s ability to work, irrespective of age, education or work experience.”

Section 404.1520(c) establishes a medically focused threshold step requiring a severe impairment that significantly limits basic work activities before the disability claim proceeds to later steps.

Hall v. Heckler · filed 1985-02-11(c)

The regulations at 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1520 and 416.920, implement the statutory scheme. Sections 404.1520(c), (d) and 416.-920(c), (d) establish a threshold test for disability determinations that focuses on medically determinable impairments. Sections 404.1520(e), (f) and 416.920(e), (f) reflect the statute’s intent that the severe impairment be of such a degree that the claimant cannot perform past work or, in light of vocational factors, any other work in the national economy. ... Thus the statutory language, particularly when read in the light of its history, plainly establishes the validity of the severity regulation.

Section 404.1520(c) treats a severe impairment as a disorder that significantly limits a person's physical or mental abilities to perform basic work activities.

Jose E. Carrillo Marin v. Secretary of Health and Human Services · filed 1985-03-28(c)

Although the Act does not define “severe impairment,” the regulations indicate that it comprehends a disorder that “significantly limit[s] ... physical or mental abilities to do basic work activities.” 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520(c).

Section 404.1520(c) imposes only a de minimis severity requirement, excluding impairments that are slight abnormalities with a minimal effect not expected to interfere with work regardless of age, education, or work experience.

Oster v. Heckler · filed 1984-09-25(c)

Therefore, an impairment will be considered as not severe only if it is a slight abnormality which has such a minimal effect on the individual that it would not be expected to interfere with the individual’s ability to work, irrespective of age, education or work experience.

Section 404.1520(c) requires the step-two severity determination to use the court's slight-abnormality standard, and a claim must be remanded if the correct standard is not used.

Davis v. Margaret M. Heckler, Secretary of Health and Human Services · filed 1985-05-02(c)

In view of both the Secretary’s position in this case and our recent experience with cases where the disposition has been on the basis of nonseverity, we will in the future assume that the AU and Appeals Council have applied an incorrect standard to the severity requirement unless the correct standard is set forth by reference to this opinion or another of the same effect, or by an express statement that the construction we give to 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520(c) (1984) is used. Unless the correct standard is used, the claim must be remanded to the Secretary for reconsideration.

Section 404.1520(c) requires that an impairment be treated as nonsevere only under the slight-abnormality standard, and the correct standard must be expressly used or referenced or the claim must be remanded.

Edward JASON, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Margaret M. HECKLER, Secretary of Health and Human Services, Defendant-Appellee · filed 1985-07-05(c)

In view of both the Secretary’s position in this case and our recent experience with cases where the disposition has been on the basis of nonseverity, we will in the future assume that the AU and Appeals Council have applied an incorrect standard to the severity requirement unless the correct standard is set forth by reference to this opinion or another of the same effect, or by an express statement that the construction we give to 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520(c) (1984) is used. Unless the correct standard is used, the claim must be remanded to the Secretary for reconsideration.

Section 404.1520(c) cannot be used to deny benefits based solely on a severity threshold that bypasses consideration of medical and vocational factors because the regulation is inconsistent with the Social Security Act.

BAEDER v. Margaret HECKLER, Secretary of Health and Human Services of the United States, Appellant · filed 1985-07-24(c)

We believe that section 1520(c) of the regulations does more than allow the Secretary to deny benefits summarily to those applicants with impairments of a minimal nature which could never prevent a person from working. It also allows the Secretary to bypass a full-scale evaluation, which would consider and relate both medical and vocational factors, of an applicant who might actually be entitled to benefits were his age, education and work experience considered. ... As it stands, we hold that the severity regulation, 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520(c), is inconsistent with the Social Security Act, and therefore, is invalid.

Section 404.1520(c) requires a claimant to show an impairment that is more than a slight abnormality with only a minimal effect on the ability to perform basic work activities before the sequential evaluation can proceed.

Evelyn FLYNN, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Margaret HECKLER, Secretary, Department of Health and Human Services, Defendant-Ap · filed 1985-08-16(c)

As we construe § 404.1520(c), and the caselaw interpreting that section, we are required to ask whether a reasonable mind could review the appellant’s evidence of hypertension and still conclude that that condition has only a minimal effect on her ability to perform the most general and rudimentary functions of a work activity as those functions are set out in the regulation, 20 C.F.R. § 404.1521(b). In other words, the issue is whether or not hypertension has only a minimal effect on her ability to: walk, stand, sit, lift, push, pull, reach, carry, or handle, etc.

Section 404.1520 requires sequential evaluation and permits ending review at step two only when an impairment does not significantly limit basic work activities; past work with an impairment does not by itself establish nonseverity, and impairments must be considered in combination.

Harvey S. MOWERY, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Margaret M. HECKLER, Secretary of Health and Human Services, Defendant-Appelle · filed 1985-09-03(a), (c)

We find it beyond dispute that appellant's impairments, when considered in combination, significantly limit his abilities to perform basic work activities. ... Yet, the ALJ found that because appellant has demonstrated the ability to function at his present level of retardation, his mental impairment is not severe. Similarly, the district court did not even consider appellant's mental impairment because appellant had worked with that impairment in the past. However, the Secretary's "non-severe" regulation does not define an impairment as non-severe if an individual has worked and functioned with the impairment. Rather, the regulation states that an impairment is not severe if it does not significantly limit one's ability to do basic work activities. It does not logically follow from the fact that an individual has worked that such limitations do not exist. It simply establishes that there are at least some jobs the individual has been able to perform. ... In sum, the fact that an individual has worked in the past cannot relieve the Secretary from the obligation of evaluating whether the individual may nevertheless have a severe impairment(s). This evaluation must be made according to the Secretary's own definition and criteria.

Section 404.1520(c) treats an impairment as not severe only when it is a slight abnormality with such a minimal effect that it would not be expected to interfere with the claimant’s ability to work, regardless of age, education, or work experience.

Elio R. GARZA, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Margaret M. HECKLER, Secretary, Department of Health and Human Services, Defendan · filed 1985-09-23(c)

At this step, according to the present regulations, the Secretary determines, solely on the basis of medical factors, whether the claimant has a “severe” impairment which “significantly limits [the claimant’s] physical or mental ability to do basic work activities____” 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1520(c), 416.920(e). ... This Court has stated that the following standard is to be applied in determining whether an impairment is severe: ... “[A]n impairment can be considered as not severe only if it is a slight abnormality which has such minimal effect on the individual that it would not be expected to interfere with the individual’s ability to work, irrespective of age, education or work experience.”

At step two of the sequential evaluation, an impairment is not severe when it does not significantly limit the claimant’s ability to perform basic work activities.

Barbara BUNCH, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Margaret HECKLER, Secretary of Health and Human Services, Defendant-Appellee · filed 1985-12-05(c)

The Social Security Regulations prescribe a sequential inquiry to be followed in determining whether a claimant is disabled. ... A negative answer in step two (whether the claimant’s impairment is “severe”) leads to a determination that the claimant is not disabled. 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1520(c); 416.-920(c). ... We hold that the medical evidence and Bunch’s testimony before the administrative law judge are sufficient to support a conclusion that her mental impairment did not significantly limit her ability to do basic work activities including use of judgment; responding appropriately to supervision, co-workers and usual work situations; and dealing with changes in a routine work setting. ... Accordingly, we hold that the administrative law judge’s finding that Bunch’s mental impairment was not severe is supported by substantial evidence and thus affirm the Secretary’s decision to deny benefits to Bunch.

Section 404.1520(c) treats an impairment as not severe only when it is a slight abnormality with such a minimal effect that it would not be expected to interfere with the claimant’s ability to work, regardless of age, education, or work experience.

Donald HAMPTON, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Otis W. BOWEN, Secretary of Health & Human Services, Defendant-Appellee · filed 1986-04-02(c)

To ensure application of the proper standard, this Court has construed the current regulation as setting the following standard for non-severity: ... [A]n impairment can be considered as not severe only if it is a slight abnormality which has such minimal effect on the individual that it would not be expected to interfere with the individual’s ability to work, irrespective of age, education, or work experience. ... [W]e will in the future assume that the AU and Appeals Council have applied an incorrect standard to the severity requirement unless the correct standard is set forth by reference to this opinion or another of the same effect, or by an express statement that the construction we give to 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520(c) (1984) is used. Unless the correct standard is used, the claim must be remanded to the Secretary for reconsideration.

Section 404.1520(c) treats an impairment as non-severe when it is only a slight abnormality with a minimal effect that is not expected to interfere with the claimant’s ability to work; the court applied that threshold and found Bridges’s impairments non-severe.

Eddie BRIDGES, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Otis R. BOWEN, Secretary of Health & Human Services, Defendant-Appellee · filed 1987-03-18(c)

The record supports the determination that Bridges’ impairments and related symptomatology are embraced within the meaning of a “slight abnormality,” and do not constitute a severe impairment.

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

Herminia Sanchez BARRIENTOS, Plaintiff, Appellant, v. SECRETARY OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES, Defendant, Appellee · filed 1987-03-24(c)

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

Section 404.1520(c) treats an impairment as severe only when it significantly limits the claimant’s ability to perform basic work activities; a slight abnormality with minimal effect on the ability to work is not severe.

Ozie L. HILLSMAN, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Otis R. BOWEN, Secretary of Health & Human Services, Defendant-Appellee · filed 1986-10-09(c)

For this conclusion to stand, we must find substantial support that the alleged impairment is “merely a slight abnormality with minimal effect on [the applicant’s] general ability to work.” ... Because the record does not contain substantial evidence to support the determination by the Administrative Law Judge that the diabetes and hypertension are not disabling because controllable, we REVERSE the decision of the district court and REMAND the case for further determinations regarding the elegibility of appellant for disability benefits.

Section 404.1520(c)'s step-two severity standard must be applied in light of the 1968 regulation defining a non-severe impairment as a slight abnormality or combination of slight abnormalities.

Janet J. YUCKERT, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Otis R. BOWEN, Secretary of Health and Human Services, Defendant-Appellee · filed 1988-03-08(c)

We agree that at the time of Yuckert’s claim, the severity regulation should have been applied in light of the 1968 regulation.

At the second step, § 404.1520(c) is satisfied when a claimant shows more than a slight abnormality causing some significant limitation on the ability to work.

Lynn v. Bowen · filed 1988-08-23(c)

However, this step of the evaluation process is satisfied if the plaintiff shows that she suffers more than a slight abnormality which causes some significant limitation on the ability to do work.

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

Hutchison v. Bowen · filed 1988-10-26(c)

A “severe" impairment under the regulations is one which significantly limits one's physical or mental ability to do basic work activities.

Section 404.1520(c) treats an impairment as non-severe only when it is a slight abnormality with such a minimal effect that it would not be expected to interfere with the claimant's ability to work.

Spellman v. Shalala · filed 1993-09-07(c)

"An impairment can be considered as not severe only if it is a slight abnormality which has such minimal effect on the individual that it would not be expected to interfere with the individual's ability to work, irrespective of age, education or work experience.' ... We agree with Spellman that the Secretary failed to indicate that it evaluated the severity of her mental disability in accordance with Estran and Stone. On remand, the Secretary should reconsider the facts in light of the proper standard set forth in those cases. See Stone, 752 F.2d at 1106 (We will "assume that the ALJ and Appeals Council have applied an incorrect standard to the severity requirement unless the correct standard is set forth by reference to this opinion or another of the same effect, or by an express statement that the construction we give to 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520(c) (1984) is used.").

An impairment is severe only if it significantly limits a claimant's physical or mental ability to perform basic work activities.

Agee v. Chater, Commissioner · filed 1996-11-12(c)

An impairment is severe only if it "significantly limits [one's] physical or mental ability to do basic work activities." 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520(c).

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

Davis v. Shirley S. Chater, Commissioner of Social Security · filed 1996-12-19(c)

An impairment or combination of impairments is considered "severe" only if it causes a claimant to be "unable to engage in any substantial gainful activity," that is, only if it significantly limits the claimant's ability to perform basic work activities. 42 U.S.C. § 1382c(a)(3)(A) (1992); 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1520(c), 416.920(c) (1996).

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

Hamilton v. John J. Callahan, Acting Commissioner Social Security Administration · filed 1998-01-14(c)

The regulations, 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1520(c), 416.920(c) provide that an impairment is severe if it significantly limits one's ability to perform basic work activities.

Section 404.1520 requires the disability determination to follow a five-step process, including determining at step two whether the claimant has a severe impairment that significantly limits the ability to perform basic work activities.

Guyton v. Apfel · filed 1998-08-31(c)

The Administrative Law Judge was required to follow the five-step inquiry process set out in 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520 in making the disability determination. ... There, the Administrative Law Judge had to determine whether Guyton’s impairment(s) was “severe,” defined as “any impairment or combination of impairments which significantly limits [one’s] physical or mental ability to do basic work activities.” 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520(c).

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

Gasaway v. Kenneth S. Apfel, Commissioner, Social Security Administration · filed 1999-08-16(c)

In his decision, the ALJ found that Ms. Gasaway "has severe impairments within the meaning of the [SSA] regulations," i.e., impairments that "significantly limit[] [a claimant's] physical ... ability to do basic work activities," see 20 C.F.R. 404.1520(c); see also 42 U.S.C. 423(d)(1)(A), 423(d)(2)(A), 423(d)(2)(B), and 20 C.F.R. 404.1521(a). ... We have examined the record thoroughly, and the ALJ's factual finding regarding the severity of Ms. Gasaway's physical impairments is adequately supported by the evidence. We therefore hold that if, on remand, the SSA's development of the record results in a finding that Ms. Gasaway's current verbal or other IQ unequivocally satisfies the requirements for the first criterion under 12.05C, she is disabled, as a matter of law.

An impairment is severe when it significantly limits a claimant’s physical or mental ability to perform basic work activities.

Nelson v. Kenneth S. Apfel, Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2000-04-27(c)

An impairment is severe if it “significantly limits your physical or mental ability to do basic work activities,” 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520(c), and thus an impairment is “not severe” if “it does not significantly limit your physical or mental ability to do basic work activities.” 20 C.F.R. § 404.1521(a).

An impairment is not severe unless it significantly limits a person's physical or mental ability to perform basic work activities.

Eaker v. Apfel · filed 2000-07-11(c)

Further, Social Security regulations state that there is no disability if "you do not have any impairment or combination of impairments which sig- nificantly limits your physical or mental ability to do basic work activities." 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520(c) (1999). ... The ALJ conducted an extensive inquiry into the nature and degree of each ailment and correctly concluded that none of these conditions, either singularly or cumulatively, significantly limited Eaker's physical or mental ability to do basic work activities for a period of twelve months or more.

Section 404.1520(a) requires an impairment expected to result in death or last at least 12 months, and § 404.1520(c) requires a severe impairment to significantly limit the ability to perform basic work activities.

Cottrill v. Apfel · filed 2000-06-27(a), (c)

Before a claimant can be found disabled 'under Social Security regulations, he or she must first establish the existence of a “severe” impairment which is expected to “result in death” or has lasted or is expected to last “for a continuous period of not less than 12 months.” 20 C.F.R. § 404.1505(a) and § 404.1520(a). To be “severe,” an impairment must significantly limit a claimant’s physical or mental ability to do basic work activities. 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520(c). ... In sum, the Court finds that plaintiffs recurrent urinary tract infections and chronic pain constituted a “severe” impairment meeting the duration requirement during her period of eligibility for DIB.

Section 404.1520(c)(1) treats an impairment as severe when it significantly limits a claimant’s physical or mental ability to do basic work activities.

Loveless v. Massanari · filed 2001-04-11(c)(1)

The condition is severe if it significantly limits claimant’s physical or mental ability to do basic work activities. 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1520(c)(1), 416.920(c).

At step two, an impairment is severe when it significantly limits a claimant’s ability to perform basic work activities; it need not itself be disabling.

Culler v. Massanari · filed 2001-05-22(c)

First, the law does not require that plaintiff’s mental and emotional impairments be disabling to warrant inclusion in the ALJ’s hypothetical questions to the VE; it requires only that they be severe, i.e., significantly limit her ability to do basic work activities. See 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520(c) (defining a severe impairment); Hargis v. Sullivan, 945 F.2d 1482, 1492 (10th Cir. 1991) (“Testimony elicited by hypothetical questions that do not relate with precision all of a claimant's impairments cannot constitute substantial evidence to support the Secretary’s decision.” (quotation omitted)); Evans v. Chater, 55 F.3d 530, 532 (10th Cir. 1995) (noting “established rule that such inquiries must include all (and only) those impairments borne out by the evidentiary record”).

Section 404.1520(c) requires the second step of disability review to determine, from the medical evidence, whether the claimant has a severe impairment.

Mastro v. Apfel, Commissioner · filed 2001-07-05(c)

If not, the analysis continues to determine whether, based upon the medical evidence, the claimant has a severe impairment. 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520(c).

Section 404.1520(c) requires determining whether alleged impairments are severe enough to impose significant restrictions on the claimant’s ability to perform basic work activities.

Cole v. Barnhart · filed 2003-05-28(c)

The record shows that the ALJ used the proper standard to determine whether Cole’s alleged impairments were of a severity to impose significant restrictions on Cole’s ability to perform basic work activities.

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

Graham v. Barnhart · filed 2003-09-30(c)

Title 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520(c) provides that an impairment is severe if it significantly limits one’s ability to perform basic work activities.

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

Samuel v. Barnhart · filed 2003-12-23(c)

An impairment is severe if it significantly limits the claimant’s “physical or mental ability to do basic work activities.” 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1520(c),1521(a).

An impairment is severe when it significantly limits a claimant's physical or mental ability to do basic work activities.

Bruet v. Barnhart · filed 2004-03-31(c)

Here, plaintiffs diagnosis of fibromyal-gia is undisputed. The ALJ himself found that the medical evidence establishes that the plaintiff has fibrositis (fibromyalgia), an impairment which is severe. (Tr. 19). Thus, by definition, plaintiffs fibromyalgia significantly limits her physical or mental ability to do basic work activities. 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520(c).

An impairment is severe at step two only if it significantly limits the claimant’s ability to perform basic work activities.

Huhta v. Barnhart · filed 2004-05-17(c)

In light of this finding, I need not consider plaintiff’s argument that the ALJ erred by failing to consider plaintiff's neck and right knee impairments as severe. There is no evidence in the record that either impairment significantly affected plaintiff's ability to engage in basic work activities. 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520(c). Plaintiff’s argument that these impairments "obviously impacted on the plaintiff's ability to do such activities [as] standing, walking, pushing, pulling, and carrying” is not persuasive. (Dkt. # 7, at 13).

Section 404.1520(c) treats an impairment as not severe only when it is a slight abnormality with a minimal effect that would not be expected to interfere with the claimant’s ability to work, and the slight-abnormality test is not applied after the impairment is found severe.

Robinson v. Barnhart · filed 2006-06-02(c)

The court also finds no merit in Robinson’s argument that the ALJ erred in failing to apply the “slight abnormality” standard. In Stone v. Heckler, this circuit interpreted the term “severe” found in 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520(c) and determined that an impairment is “considered not severe only if it is a slight abnormality” that has such a “minimal effect on the individual that it would not be expected to interfere with an individual’s ability to work.” 752 F.2d 1099, 1101 (5th Cir. 1985). See also Loza v. Apfel, 219 F.3d 378, 390–91 (5th Cir. 2000). While the “slight abnormality” standard is used by an ALJ to determine whether an impairment is severe, that standard is not applied after the ALJ finds the impairment to be severe. Harrell v. Bowen, 862 F.2d 471, 481 (5th Cir. 1988) (distinguishing between severe and disabling impairments); Chapparo v. Bowen, 815 F.2d 1008, 1011 (5th Cir. 1987) (same).

Section 404.1520(c) defines a severe impairment as an impairment or combination of impairments that significantly limits a claimant’s physical or mental ability to perform basic work activities, and the Listing 12.05C requirement is less stringent.

Vaughn v. Astrue · filed 2007-05-10(c)

The second part of the Listing, therefore, imposes a less stringent requirement than that imposed by 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520(c). Section 404.1520 sets forth the five-step sequential process by which a claimant’s disability is evaluated. Section 404.1520(c) defines “severe impairment” to require that the impairment or combination of impairments significantly limit the claimant’s physical or mental ability to do basic work activities.

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

Jones v. Astrue · filed 2007-10-15(c)

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

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

Jones v. Astrue · filed 2007-10-15(c)

An impairment is considered severe if it “significantly limits [the individual’s] physical or mental ability to do basic work activities.” 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1520(c), 416.920(c). The regulations define “basic work activities” as “the abilities and aptitudes necessary to do most jobs.”

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

Baker v. Astrue · filed 2008-04-18(c)

An impairment or combination of impairments is considered “severe” if it “significantly limits [the claimant’s] physical or mental ability to do basic work activities.” 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520(c). ... The findings of consultative examiner Dr. Sifford also provide substantial evidence in support of the ALJ’s determination. ... Dr. Sifford concluded that there was no evidence of any significant restriction in Plaintiffs basic mobility. Tr., at 237. Such a conclusion directly supports the ALJ’s determination that Plaintiff does not suffer from any severe physical impairments.

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

Duran v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2008-10-14(c)

The ALJ found that there was no evidence that Duran’s condition was “severe” under the applicable regulations because Duran had presented no evidence of “any impairment or combination of impairments which significantly limits [his] physical or mental ability to do basic work activities.” 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1520(c), 416.920(c). Substantial evidence supports the ALJ’s determination.

An impairment is severe when it significantly limits the claimant’s physical or mental ability to perform basic work activities.

Ogden v. Astrue · filed 2009-01-23(c)

To be “severe,” an impairment must significantly limit the claimant’s physical or mental ability to do basic work activities. 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520(c), 416.920(c).

Section 404.1520(c) treats an impairment as severe when it significantly limits a claimant’s physical or mental ability to perform basic work activities; the court upheld the finding that Duran’s condition did not meet that standard.

Duran v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2008-10-14(c)

The ALJ found that there was no evidence that Duran’s condition was “severe” under the applicable regulations because Duran had presented no evidence of “any impairment or combination of impairments which significantly limits [his] physical or mental ability to do basic work activities.” 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1520(c), 416.920(c). Substantial evidence supports the ALJ’s determination. ... There is no indication in Duran’s medical records of any condition that significantly limits his ability to perform basic work tasks.

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

Martin v. Astrue · filed 2009-07-16(c)

Further, substantial evidence in the record supports the ALJ’s determination that Martin’s obesity is not a “severe” impairment that “significantly limits [her] physical or mental ability to do basic work activities.” 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520(c).

An impairment is severe under § 404.1520(c) only if it significantly limits a person’s physical or mental ability to perform basic work activities.

Mancuso v. Astrue · filed 2010-01-14(c)

Dr. Satloff, who was subject to written cross-examination, stated that Mancuso had no limitation in her ability to understand, remember, and carry out short, simple instructions or to interact appropriately with co-workers and supervisors. See 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520(c) (stating that impairment must “significantly limit[] . . . physical or mental ability to do basic work activities” to constitute “severe impairment” required for disability finding).

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

Rivera v. Astrue · filed 2011-09-29(c)

A severe impairment is one that “significantly limits your physical or mental ability to do basic work activities.... ” 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520(c). ... The hearing officer correctly concluded that Rivera’s depression did not constitute a severe impairment because he is capable of performing basic work activities.

An impairment is severe when it significantly limits a claimant’s ability to do basic work activities, and the severity screen may be used only to screen out de minimis claims.

Parker-Grose v. Astrue · filed 2012-01-06(c)

To be “disabled” within the meaning of the Social Security Act, a claimant must have an impairment or combination of impairments that are “severe.” 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520(a)(4)(ii), (c). An impairment is severe if it “significantly limits the claimant’s ability to do basic work activities.” 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520(c).1 The “severity regulation,” however, “is valid only if applied to screen out de minimis claims.” Dixon v. Shalala, 54 F.3d 1019, 1030 (2d Cir. 1995).

At step two, the ALJ must determine whether the claimant has a severe impairment that significantly limits the claimant’s physical or mental ability to do basic work activities.

Ritter v. Astrue · filed 2012-05-15(c)

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 two, an impairment is severe if it has more than a minimal impact on a claimant’s ability to perform basic work activities, and the impairment’s functional effects must be discussed.

Suarez v. Astrue · filed 2013-05-08(a) and (c)

By identifying obesity as a severe impairment, the ALJ acknowledged that it had more than a minimal impact upon Suarez’s ability to do basic work activities. 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520(a) and (c). By this token, the extent to which it does impact her abilities must be discussed. If the ALJ did not believe the obesity had such an impact, he could have found it not to be a severe impairment.

At step two, a claimant is not disabled if the claimant does not have a severe impairment.

Tapia v. Colvin · filed 2013-06-03(c)

Substantial evidence supports the ALJ’s findings, including the evaluation of the severity of Tapia’s mental impairments. See 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520(c) (lack of severe impairment means claimant is not disabled).

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

McNatt v. Colvin · filed 2014-08-27(c)

A severe impairment is one “which significantly limits [the claimant’s] physical or mental ability to do basic work activities.” 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1520(c), 416.920(c). Thus, a severe impairment has more than a slight or minimal effect on the claimant’s ability to work, and it would fulfill the second prong of Listing 12.05C.

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

Wilhelm v. Commissioner of Social Security Administration · filed 2015-03-13(c)

Considering the medical evidence, including the lack of any significant treatment records for Wilhelm’s foot after 2006, the ALJ reasonably inferred that Wilhelm’s foot impairment did not significantly limit her ability to do basic work activities.

Section 404.1520(c) requires a claimant to show that an impairment is severe and significantly limits the ability to perform basic work activities.

Phelps v. Berryhill · filed 2017-11-07(c)

Phelps had the burden to demonstrate that her mental impairments were severe, Molina v. Astrue, 674 F.3d 1104, 1110 (9th Cir. 2012), and significantly limited her ability to do basic work activities, 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520(c). The ALJ did not err in finding that Phelps failed to meet that burden and, in doing so, discounting the opinions of Drs. Robert Marselle and Kara Cross who each examined Phelps once, and two other non-examining physicians who reviewed Phelps’ medical records.

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

France v. Social Security Administration Commissioner · filed 2017-11-15(c)

Based on Dr. Kamalov’s recommendations, the impairment could significantly limit her physical ability to do basic work activities. See Pelkey v. Barnhart, 433 F.3d 575, 577 (8th Cir. 2006) (quoting 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520(c)).

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

Garcia v. Nancy Berryhill, Acting Cmsnr · filed 2018-01-22(c)

The regulations define a severe impairment as “any impairment or combination of impairments which significantly limits [one’s] physical or mental ability to do basic work activities.” 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520(c). This court considers a “slight abnormality” to be non-severe wherever it has “such minimal effect on that individual that it would not be expected to interfere with the individual’s ability to work.” Stone v. Heckler, 752 F.2d 1099, 1101 (5th Cir. 1985) (citations omitted). The ALJ cited Stone and rigorously considered the four broad functional areas set out in the disability regulation for evaluating the severity of mental disorders, 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520a(d)(1), before concluding that Garcia’s impairments were merely mild. 5 Garcia presents no evidence to suggest the wrong standard was applied.

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

Rodden v. Social Security Administration Commissioner · filed 2018-03-13(a)(4)(ii)

An impairment is severe within the meaning of the regulations if it significantly limits an individual’s ability to perform basic work activities. 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520(a)(4)(ii). ... The Court concurs with the ALJ’s finding that despite this history, the record did not establish any functional limitation as a result, Plaintiff had a normal gait upon examination, and he was able to work after his most recent knee surgery.

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

Lau v. Comm'r of Soc. Sec. · filed 2018-10-22(c)

Under the Commissioner's regulations, an alleged impairment is "severe" only "if it significantly limits an individual's physical or mental abilities to do basis work activities."

At step two, § 404.1520(c) requires the ALJ to determine whether an impairment or combination of impairments significantly limits the claimant’s ability to perform basic work activities; a severe-impairment showing is de minimis but requires more than the mere presence of a condition.

Paris v. Social Security Administration, Commissioner of · filed 2019-09-06(c)

At step two, the ALJ must determine whether the claimant has an “impairment or combination of impairments which significantly limits [her] . . . ability to do basic work activities.” 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520(c). To establish a “severe” impairment at step two of the sequential evaluation process, plaintiff must make only a “de minimis” showing. Cowan v. Astrue, 552 F.3d 1182, 1186 (10th Cir. 2008) (citation omitted). The claimant, however, must show more than the mere presence of a condition or ailment. Id. If an impairment’s medical severity is so slight that it could not interfere with or have a serious impact on plaintiff’s ability to do basic work activities, it could not prevent plaintiff from engaging in substantial work activity and will not be considered severe. Hinkle v. Apfel, 132 F.3d 1349, 1352 (10th Cir. 1997).

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

Mojica v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2019-09-11(c)

Under the Commissioner’s regulations, an alleged impairment is “severe” only “if it significantly limits an individual’s physical or mental abilities to do basic work activities.” SSR 96-3p, 1996 WL 374181, at *1 (S.S.A. July 2, 1996); 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520(c).

Section 404.1520(c) treats an impairment as severe when it significantly limits a claimant’s ability to perform basic work activities; an impairment causing no more than minimal functional limitation is not severe.

Thomas v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2019-09-13(c)

An impairment is severe if it significantly limits physical or mental abilities to do basic work activities. 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520(c). Conversely, an impairment is not severe “if it is a slight abnormality “that causes no more than minimal limitation in the individual’s ability to function independently, appropriately, and effectively in an age-appropriate manner.” ... Plaintiff’s activities of daily living, combined with the medical evidence of record, support the ALJ’s determination that plaintiff’s symptoms of anxiety and depression cause no more than mild limitations in plaintiff’s functional capacity to perform basic work activity and is not, therefore, severe.

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

Doss v. Commissioner Of Social Security · filed 2019-09-23(c)

An impairment or combination of impairments is severe when it “significantly limits [the individual’s] physical or mental ability to do basic work activities.” 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1520(c), 416.920(c); see also §§ 404.1522(a), 416.922(a)(defining non-severe impairments).

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

Carlisle v. Saul · filed 2019-09-30(c)

A severe impairment is one that significantly limits the claimant’s ability to do basic work activities. 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520(c). ... Moreover, even if some evidence suggests that Plaintiff digresses in conversation, other evidence supports the ALJ’s conclusion that this is no more than a slight abnormality, and this Court’s standard of review demands deference to the ALJ’s factual findings.

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

Whorton v. Social Security Administration, Commissioner · filed 2019-11-25(c)

A severe impairment is a condition that “significantly limits [one’s] physical or mental ability to do basic work activities.” 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520(c). Showing a severe impairment requires more than “a diagnosis or a mere showing of ‘a deviation from purely medical standards of bodily perfection or normality.’” Wind v. Barnhart, 133 F. App’x. 684, 690(11th Cir. 2005) (citing McCruter v. Bowen, 791 F.2d 1544, 1547 (11th Cir. 1986)). Here, substantial evidence supports the ALJ’s decision in finding that the above listed impairments were not severe.

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

Sullivan v. Commissioner of Social Security Administration · filed 2020-01-07(c)

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

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

Bolden v. Social Security Administration, Commissioner of · filed 2020-03-09(c)

A "severe impairment" is defined as an impairment or combination of impairments "which significantly limits your physical or mental ability to do basic work activities." 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520(c). An impairment or combination of impairments is not "severe" if it has no more than a minimal impact on an individual's physical or mental ability to do basic work activities. See 20 C.F.R. § 404.1522; Social Security Ruling (SSR) 85-28, 96-3p. Thus, to establish that her impairments were "severe," Plaintiff had the burden to show that they more than minimally impacted her ability to perform basic work activities for the twelve-month durational requirements of the Act. See 20 C.F.R. § 404.1522.

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

Stoutmeyer v. Berryhill · filed 2020-03-13(c)

An impairment is “severe” if it “significantly limits [a claimant’s] physical or mental ability to do basic work activities.” 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1520(c), 416.920(c). Otherwise, it is not severe. 20 C.F.R. § 404.1522, 416.922. Here, the ALJ’s focus on the impact of Petitioner’s mental health limitations, rather than on the diagnoses themselves, was consistent with the applicable legal standard.

An impairment is severe when it significantly affects a claimant’s ability to perform work-related activities, regardless of age, education, or work experience.

Carson v. Social Security Administration, Commissioner · filed 2020-03-18(c)

An impairment is severe if it significantly affects a claimant’s ability to perform work-related activities, regardless of his age, education and work experience. See 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1520(c), 4040.1521(a). Here, substantial evidence supports the ALJ’s decision that neither the claimant’s IBS nor insomnia met this definition.

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

Cushman v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2020-03-26(c)

Rather, an impairment is “severe” if it “significantly limits [the plaintiff’s] ability to do basic work activities.” 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520(c). Basic work activities include, among others, physical functions such as walking, standing, sitting, lifting, pushing, pulling, reaching, carrying and handling. See 20 C.F.R. § 404.1522(b)(1). Here, the ALJ’s finding that the plaintiff’s joint pain was not severe is supported by substantial evidence.

Section 404.1520(c) treats an impairment as severe when it significantly limits the claimant’s physical or mental ability to perform basic work activities, and the severity determination must account for all of the claimant’s mental impairments.

Woodson v. Saul · filed 2020-03-30(c)

A severe impairment is one that “significantly limits [the claimant’s] physical or mental ability to do basic work activities.” 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520(c). ... In failing to consider and address all of Plaintiff’s mental impairments, the ALJ’s decision, as it is currently written, is not supported by substantial evidence. ... Therefore, I will remand the case for further consideration in light of Plaintiff’s bipolar disorder diagnosis.

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

Woodard v. Berryhill · filed 2020-03-27(c)

Under the Commissioner’s regulations, a severe impairment is “any impairment or combination of impairments which significantly limits [a claimant’s] physical or mental ability to do basic work activities.” 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520(c).

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

Handau v. Berryhill · filed 2020-07-23(c)

In order for an impairment to be severe, the impairment must “significantly limit[] [a claimant’s] physical or mental ability to do basic work activities.” 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520(c). In other words, the impairment must have “more than a minimal effect on an individual’s physical or mental ability(ies) to do basic work activities[.]” Social Security Ruling [“SSR”] 85-28, 1985 WL 56856, at *3 (S.S.A. Jan. 1, 1985). Moreover, an impairment “must have lasted or must be expected to last for a continuous period of at least 12 months.” 20 C.F.R. § 404.1509.

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

Dial v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2020-09-14(c)

A determination that the Claimant’s migraines are a severe impairment means the ALJ found the migraines significantly limited the Claimant’s physical and/or mental ability to do basic work activities.

At step two, § 404.1520(c) asks whether the claimant has a severe impairment that significantly limits the ability to perform basic work activities; an error at that step may be harmless when the impairment is considered in the RFC assessment.

Barnes v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2020-09-28(c)

The second step is whether the applicant has a severe impairment which significantly limits the physical or mental ability to do basic work activities, as defined in the relevant regulations. 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1520(c) and 416.920(c). ... Even assuming, arguendo, the ALJ erred at step two in failing to find Plaintiff’s psychiatric impairment to be a severe impairment, such error was harmless. Specifically, the record establishes that in proceeding through the five-step sequential analysis, the ALJ included the symptoms of Plaintiff’s psychiatric impairments in assessing Plaintiff’s RFC. ... Accordingly, even if the ALJ’s determination at step two that Plaintiff’s psychiatric impairments are not severe is erroneous, such error was harmless because the ALJ considered the effect of such impairments in determining Plaintiff’s RFC.

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

Stafford v. Andrew Saul, Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2020-10-02(c)

To obtain disability benefits, Stafford must demonstrate that she has an “impairment or combination of impairments which significantly limits [her] physical or mental ability to do basic work activities.” 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520.

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

Sherry Ann Lizotte, Claimant v. Andrew Saul, Commissioner, Social Security Administration, Defendant · filed 2020-10-23(c)

A “severe” impairment (or combination of impairments) is one “which significantly limits [the claimant’s] physical or mental ability to do basic work activities.” 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520(c). ... Based upon the evidence properly before the ALJ, his determination that claimant’s migraines do not constitute a severe impairment is supported by substantial evidence. ... Next, claimant challenges the ALJ’s finding that her mental impairments were not “severe” – that is, that they did not significantly limit her physical or mental ability to do basic work activities. See 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520(c). ... Based upon his conclusions regarding the paragraph B criteria, and consistent with the governing regulations, the ALJ concluded that claimant’s mental impairments were not severe.

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

Lizotte v. US Social Security Administration, Commissioner · filed 2020-10-23(c)

A “severe” impairment (or combination of impairments) is one “which significantly limits [the claimant’s] physical or mental ability to do basic work activities.” 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520(c). ... Based upon the evidence properly before the ALJ, his determination that claimant’s migraines do not constitute a severe impairment is supported by substantial evidence. ... Next, claimant challenges the ALJ’s finding that her mental impairments were not “severe” – that is, that they did not significantly limit her physical or mental ability to do basic work activities. See 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520(c). ... Based upon his conclusions regarding the paragraph B criteria, and consistent with the governing regulations, the ALJ concluded that claimant’s mental impairments were not severe.

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

Furey v. Saul · filed 2020-11-13(c)

“An impairment or combination of impairments is ‘severe’ if it significantly limits a claimant’s ability to perform basic work activities.” ... “Those records, however, do not suggest that Ms. Furey’s back pain would significantly limit her ability to perform basic work activities and, therefore, do not undermine ALJ Klibaner’s conclusion, which is entitled to deference when, as here, it is supported by substantial evidence.”

At step two, an impairment is severe only if it significantly limits a claimant’s physical or mental ability to perform basic work activities; failing to classify an impairment as severe is harmless when the ALJ considers its effects in the later analysis.

Askins v. Saul · filed 2020-12-07(c)

A severe impairment is defined in the regulations as “any impairment or combination of impairments which significantly limits your physical or mental ability to do basic work activities.” 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520(c). ... It is possible that the ALJ erred in failing to find Plaintiff’s OSA to be a severe impairment; however, even if she did so err, the error was harmless. ... Here, to the extent that the ALJ erred in failing to find Plaintiff’s OSA a severe impairment, the error was harmless because the ALJ proceeded with the analysis and considered all of Plaintiff’s symptoms, including the pain, fatigue, excessive sleep, and insomnia which Plaintiff contends to be associated with OSA.

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

Deaner v. Comm'r of Soc. Sec. · filed 2020-12-21(c)

A severe impairment is an impairment “which significantly limits [the claimant’s] physical or mental ability to do basic work activities.” 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520(c). A claimant bears the burden of proving that an impairment is severe. Higgs v. Bowen, 880 F.2d 860, 863 (6th Cir. 1988) (per curiam). ... Because the ALJ’s designation of severe impairments was supported by substantial evidence, our inquiry on step two ends.

Section 404.1520(c) treats an impairment as not severe when it does not significantly limit a claimant’s physical or mental ability to perform basic work activities.

Dailey v. Saul · filed 2021-03-01(c)

The SSA provides an impairment is not severe if the claimant does “not have any impairment or combination of impairments which significantly limits your physical or mental ability to do basic work activities.” 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520(c). In Stone, the Fifth Circuit construed this regulation to establish a threshold for severe impairment, holding: “An impairment can be considered as not severe only if it is a slight abnormality having such minimal effect on the individual that it would not be expected to interfere with the individual’s ability to work, irrespective of age, education, or work experience.” Stone, 752 F.2d at 1101.

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

Dillon v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2021-03-22(c)

A “severe impairment” is defined as an impairment or combination of impairments “which significantly limits your physical or mental ability to do basic work activities.” 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520(c). Upon determining that a claimant has one severe impairment the ALJ must continue with the remaining steps in the disability evaluation. See Maziarz v. Secretary of Health & Human Servivces, 837 F.2d 240, 244 (6th Cir. 1987). Once the ALJ determines that a claimant suffers from a severe impairment, the fact that the ALJ failed to classify a separate condition as a severe impairment does not constitute reversible error. Maziarz, 837 F.2d at 244. An ALJ can consider such non-severe conditions in determining the claimant’s residual functional capacity. Id.

Section 404.1520(c) treats an impairment as severe only when it significantly limits the claimant's physical or mental ability to perform basic work activities; a minimal impact is insufficient.

Prince v. Social Security Administration, Commissioner of · filed 2021-03-23(c)

A “severe impairment" is an impairment or combination of impairments, “which significantly limits your physical or mental ability to do basic work activities." 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520(c). An impairment or combination of impairments is not “severe" if it has no more than a minimal impact on an individual's physical or mental ability to do basic work activities. See 20 C.F.R. § 404.1522; Social Security Ruling (SSR) 85-28, 96-3p. Thus, to establish that her impairments were “severe," Plaintiff must show that her impairments more than minimally impact her ability to perform basic work activities for the twelve-month durational requirements under the Act. See 20 C.F.R. § 404.1522.

Section 404.1520(c) treats an impairment as severe when it significantly limits a claimant’s physical or mental ability to perform basic work activities; the court applied that standard to conclude that the claimant’s recurrent hernias were severe.

DeFelice v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2021-03-30(c)

A severe impairment is one that “significantly limits [a claimant’s] physical or mental ability to do basic work activities.” 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1520(c), 416.920(c). ... Indeed, David was unable to walk for even six minutes, so his hernia certainly presented more than a “slight abnormality [with only a] minimal effect” on David’s ability to work. See SSR 96-3p, 1996 WL 374181, at *1. Ms. Stom’s opinion therefore supports the conclusion that David’s recurrent hernias were quite severe. See 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1520(c), 416.920(c).

Section 404.1520(a)(4)(ii) treats an impairment as severe when it significantly limits the claimant’s ability to do basic work activities, and a severe impairment must be reflected in the RFC.

Wearley v. Commissioner Social Security Administration · filed 2021-05-17(a)(4)(ii)

At step two, the ALJ found that Plaintiff’s functional bowel disorder is a “severe impairment.” Tr. 15. By definition, finding a severe impairment means that it “significantly limits the claimant’s ability to do basic work activities.” C.F.R. §§ 404.1520(a)(4)(ii), 416.920(a)(4)(ii). Because the ALJ found the functional bowel disorder to be severe, the ALJ was required to include limitations related to the bowel disorder in the RFC finding.

Section 404.1520(c) treats an impairment as severe when it significantly limits an individual's ability to perform basic work activities, and the resulting limitations must be reflected in the RFC.

Rajca v. Saul · filed 2021-06-22(c)

At the outset, it is important to understand what a severe impairment is: “[a] severe impairment is one that significantly limits an individual’s ability to perform basic work activities.” Million v. Astrue, 260 F. App’x 918, 922 (7th Cir. 2008); see also, 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520(c); SSR 16-3P. ... A finding that an impairment is severe cannot square with a conclusion that it imposes no limitations. It is axiomatic that a severe impairment imposes limitations, and an impairment that imposes no limitations is not severe. ... Because the ALJ has determined this to be a severe impairment but failed to include any accommodation for it within the RFC, the ALJ’s decision is internally contradictory.

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

Garcia-Cortes v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2020-09-29(c)

First, even assuming García-Cortés’ PTSD diagnosis, he has not provided any arguments or evidence on how his alleged PTSD “significantly limit[] [his] [p]hysical or mental ability to do basic work activities.” 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520(c). ... Accordingly, the ALJ did not err in concluding that García-Cortés’ PTSD was not a severe impairment.

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

(SS) Valero v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2021-09-07(c)

A “severe” impairment or combination of impairments is one that significantly limits physical or mental ability to do basic work activities. 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520.

Section 404.1520(c) treats an impairment as severe when it significantly limits a claimant’s ability to perform basic work activities; an impairment causing only a slight or minimal limitation is not severe.

Geitz v. Kijakazi · filed 2021-09-17(c)

A severe impairment “significantly limits your physical or mental ability to do basic work activities[.]” 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1520(c), 416.920(c). “An impairment is not severe if it amounts only to a slight abnormality that would not significantly limit the claimant’s physical or mental ability to do basic work activities.” ... In sum, substantial evidence supports the ALJ’s finding that Geitz’s depression does not significantly limit his mental ability to perform basic work activities, as his functional limitations were “mild” at most. See Kirby, 500 F.3d at 707; see also 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1520a(d)(1), 416.920a(d)(1). Thus, the ALJ appropriately determined that Geitz’s depression does not constitute a severe mental impairment. See id.

Section 404.1520(a)(4)(ii) requires the ALJ, at step two of the sequential evaluation, to determine whether the claimant has a severe impairment that meets the duration requirement before continuing the evaluation.

Stanly v. Kijakazi · filed 2021-09-22(a)(4)(ii)

At step two of the five-step sequential evaluation, the ALJ determines if the claimant has an impairment, or a combination of impairments, that is severe and meets the duration requirement. 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520(a)(4)(ii). An impairment is considered “severe” if it significantly limits the claimant's ability to do basic work activities. See 20 C.F.R. § 404.1522.

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

Fischer v. Kijakazi · filed 2021-09-30(a)(4)(ii), (c)

As discussed above, the ALJ must consider the medical severity of a claimant’s impairments at step two, and must determine whether the claimant has any “severe impairments,” which are defined as impairments or a combination of impairments that significantly limit the claimant’s physical or mental ability to do basic work activities, and which have lasted or are expected to last for a continuous period of 12 months. 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1520(a)(4)(ii), (c); 404.1509. “Basic work activities” are defined as “the abilities and aptitudes necessary to do most jobs,” which include but are not limited to physical functions such as walking, standing, sitting, lifting, pushing, pulling, reaching, carrying or handling; capacities for seeing, hearing, and speaking; understanding, carrying out, and remembering simple instructions; use of judgment; responding appropriately to supervision, co-workers, and usual work situations; and dealing with changes in a routine work setting. 20 C.F.R. § 404.1522(b)(1)-(6).

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

(SS) Meza v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2021-12-20

A “severe” impairment or combination of impairments is one that significantly limits physical or mental ability to do basic work activities. 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520.

Section 404.1520(c) directs the Commissioner to find a claimant not disabled when no impairment or combination of impairments significantly limits the ability to perform basic work activities.

Schaefer v. Saul · filed 2022-02-14(c)

The severity regulation provides 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. 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520(c). ... The ALJ noted that, although plaintiff contends his knee injury is severe, plaintiff was released to work full duty with no problems seven months after plaintiff’s knee surgery. ... It is plaintiff’s burden to establish the severity of his impairment, and ample evidence supports the ALJ’s conclusion that plaintiff’s knee injuries are not severe.

Section 404.1520(c) requires a claimant to show that an impairment or combination of impairments significantly limits the ability to perform basic work activities to establish a severe impairment.

Gabel v. Social Security Administration, Commissioner of · filed 2022-06-29(c)

Although the standard for establishing a severe impairment is de minimis, a claimant still has the burden to prove that the impairment or combination of impairments significantly limits his physical and mental ability to do basic work activities. 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520(c). ... The Court agrees with the Commissioner that the ALJ did not err by omitting Plaintiff’s carpal tunnel syndrome from the list of severe impairments and by not incorporating manipulative limitations into the physical RFC. Plaintiff has not met his burden to show that his carpal tunnel syndrome resulted in manipulative limitations that significantly limited his physical ability to do basic work activities.

Section 404.1520(a)(4)(ii) requires the ALJ, at step two of the sequential evaluation, to consider the medical severity of the claimant’s impairments.

Fredenburg v. Kijakazi · filed 2022-08-30(a)(4)(ii)

Step two of the sequential evaluation requires an ALJ to “consider the medical severity of [the claimant’s] impairment(s).” 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520(a)(4)(ii).

Section 404.1520(c) treats an impairment as non-severe when it does not significantly limit a claimant’s ability to perform basic work activities.

Hsu v. Commissioner of Social Security Administration · filed 2022-09-30(c)

An impairment is non-severe if it does not significantly limit the claimant’s ability to do basic work activities. 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520(c).

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

Brewer v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2022-10-19(c)

An impairment, in order to qualify as “severe” for purposes of Social Security law, need not be debilitating in and of itself. Rather, any medically determinable impairment which “significantly limits [a claimant's] physical or mental ability to do basic work activities” is “severe” under 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520(c).

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

Golombek v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2022-11-14(c)

For an impairment to be considered severe, the impairment must “significantly limit your physical or mental ability to do basic work activities.” 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1520(c), 416.920(c); SSR 85-28.

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

Holden v. Commissioner of Social Security Administration · filed 2023-02-23(c)

The existence of a medical impairment does not necessitate a finding the impairment is severe, it is only severe if it “significantly limits” a claimant’s “mental ability to do basic work activities.” See Verduzco v. Apfel, 188 F.3d 1087, 1089 (9th Cir. 1999); see also 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1520(c), 404.1522(a); Matthews v. Shalala, 10 F.3d 678, 680 (9th Cir. 1993) (“The mere existence of an impairment is insufficient proof of a disability.”)

At step two, a diagnosis alone does not establish that an impairment is severe.

(SS)Kaur v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2023-06-27(c)

However, a diagnosis alone does not establish severity. 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520(c). See Verduzco v. Apfel, 188 F.3d 1087, 1089 (9th Cir. 1999) (“Although the appellant clearly does suffer from diabetes, high blood pressure, and arthritis, there is no evidence to support his claim that those impairments are ‘severe’).

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

Kontak v. Kijakazi · filed 2023-12-07(c)

An impairment is considered “severe” if it significantly limits an individual’s ability to perform basic work activities. 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520(c); 20 C.F.R. § 404.1522(a). So, in deeming Plaintiff’s panic disorder to be severe, the ALJ necessarily determined that Plaintiff’s panic disorder caused significant functional work limitations. Yet, aside from providing the limited analysis set forth above, the ALJ erred in that she did not explicitly explain what work limitations were associated with Plaintiff’s panic disorder nor explicitly consider the impact of Plaintiff’s panic disorder on her residual functional capacity.

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

Smith v. Social Security Administration, Commissioner · filed 2024-06-13(c)

An impairment or combination of impairments is “severe” within the meaning of the regulations if it significantly limits an individual’s ability to perform basic work activities. 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520(c).

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

Graham v. Commissioner Social Security Administration · filed 2024-06-14(c)

An impairment is “severe” if it “significantly limits [the claimant's] physical ot mental ability to do basic work activities.” 20 CER. §§ 404.1520(c), 416.920(c). ... Here, it is clear to this Court that the ALJ considered Plaintiffs non-severe impairments when determining the RFC. That he-did not incorporate any limitations flowing from “mild” impairments was not error because the record shows Plaintiff had no limitations to her mental functioning.

Section 404.1520(c) requires the Commissioner to determine whether a claimant has a medically severe impairment or combination of impairments before denying the claim at Step Two.

Ortiz-Lara v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2024-03-20(c)

At Step Two, the Commissioner determines whether the claimant has a medically severe impairment or combination of impairments. 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520(c). If not, the disability claim is denied. ... The ALJ determined that Ortiz-Lara’s carpal tunnel and pain in her hands was not severe. Tr. 23. Such a conclusion could not be reached if the notes are illegible. If the ALJ needed more information, she should have developed the record further. ... As such, I cannot say there is substantial evidence supporting the ALJ’s determination that carpal tunnel was not severe.

Section 404.1520(c) requires a claimant to have a severe impairment that significantly limits basic work activities; otherwise, the claimant is not disabled.

Olcikas v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2024-07-12(c)

According to the regulations, if the ALJ finds no severe impairment or combination of impairments, then a plaintiff is not disabled under the regulations. See 20 C.F.R. § 1520(c) (“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.”).

Section 404.1520(c) treats an impairment as not severe when it does not significantly limit the claimant's ability to do basic work activities, and the court held that SSR 85-28's minimal-effect standard is a permissible standard for this step-two inquiry.

Deerinwater v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2024-09-30(c)

Under the relevant regulation, an impairment is not severe where “[the claimant] do[es] not have any impairment or combination of impairments which significantly limits [their] physical or mental ability to do basic work activities.” 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520(c). ... Given that Keel established that SSR 85-28 comports with the Stone standard, the ALJ referenced and applied a permissible severity standard for step two. Accordingly, the Court finds that the ALJ used the correct legal standard.

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

Jonathon C. v. O'Malley · filed 2024-12-03(c)

An impairment is severe if it “significantly limit[s]” a claimant’s physical or mental ability to do basic work activities. 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520 (c). In determining that his migraines were non-severe, the ALJ cited the state agency medical consultants who found that there was no evidence that Jonathon’s migraines met that definition.

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

Bauer v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2024-12-10(c)

An impairment is considered severe when “any impairment or combination of impairments . . . significantly limits your physical or mental ability to do basic work activities”. 20 C.F.R. §404.1520(c).

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

Otto v. Commissioner Social Security Administration · filed 2025-03-06(c)

An impairment is severe if it “significantly limit[s]” claimant’s ability to do basic work activities, which are defined as “abilities and aptitudes necessary to do most jobs.” 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520(c); SSR 85-28, available at 1985 WL 56856.

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

Northern v. Bisignano · filed 2025-09-16(c)

First, the Court finds the ALJ did not err in finding at Step Two that Plaintiff’s GERD, right elbow degenerative joint disease, right knee degenerative joint disease, anxiety, depression, and chest pain with syncopal-like episodes were not severe impairments. To be severe, an impairment must “significantly limit[] [the claimant’s] physical or mental ability to do basic work activities,” 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1520(c), 416.920(c), and it “must have lasted or must be expected to last for a continuous period of at least 12 months,” 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1509, 416.909.

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

Tidmore v. Commissioner of Social Security Administration · filed 2025-09-30(c)

A “severe” impairment is defined under the regulations as “any impairment or combination of impairments which significantly limits your physical or mental ability to do basic work activities.” Griffeth v. Comm’r of Soc. Sec., 217 F. App’x 425, 428 (6th Cir. 2007) (quoting 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520(c)); see also Long v. Apfel, 1 F. App’x 326, 330-32 (6th Cir. 2001).

Section 404.1520(c) requires a step-two determination whether an impairment significantly limits basic work activities, and an error in finding an impairment non-severe may be harmless when the impairment is considered in the residual-functional-capacity assessment.

Macias · filed 2026-01-20(c)

At step two of the sequential evaluation process, an ALJ must determine whether a claimant has a medically determinable impairment or a combination of impairments that is severe. 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1520(c), 416.920(c). A “severe” impairment is one that “significantly limits [a claimant’s] physical or mental ability to do basic work activities.” Id. §§ 404.1520(c), 416.920(c). ... Upon review, the undersigned finds no error. As an initial matter, the ALJ adequately explained his reasoning as part of his step-two analysis, and the undersigned is not left to guess why the ALJ determined that Plaintiff’s IC was non-severe. ... Moreover, even if the ALJ erred in finding Plaintiff’s IC non-severe at step two—which the undersigned finds he did not—any such error was harmless because the IC was considered by the ALJ in formulating the RFC.

Section 404.1520(c) treats an impairment as severe when it significantly limits a claimant’s ability to do basic work activities, requiring adequate evaluation of the impairment at step two.

Valdez · filed 2026-03-19(c)

An impairment or combination of impairments is severe when it “significantly limits [his] ability to do basic work activities.” 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520(c). ... The ALJ’s step-two findings in this case do not reflect that the ALJ adequately considered Plaintiff’s migraine headaches. ... Remand is therefore necessary for the ALJ to properly evaluate Plaintiff's migraine headaches at step two and subsequent steps if necessary.

Section 404.1520(c) does not allow a finding that pain is nonsevere solely because the claimant does not use stronger painkillers.

Brown v. Heckler · filed 1983-11-28(c)

The fact that plaintiff does not use stronger painkilling drugs is not substantial evidence supporting the conclusion that he does not suffer pain which limits his ability to perform basic work activities.

At step two, an impairment is not severe only if it is slight and has no more than a minimal effect on the ability to perform basic work activities.

18 soc.sec.rep.ser. 721, unempl.ins.rep. Cch 17,514 Nayda R. Fernandez v. Secretary of Health and Human Services · filed 1987-08-20(c)

His opinion was based on the absence of “major functional limitations” and not, as required by SSR 85-28, a finding that the impairments were “slight” with no more than a “minimal” effect on ability to do basic work activities.

At step two, a claimant must show that an impairment significantly limits the ability to perform basic work activities; a fibromyalgia diagnosis alone does not establish severity.

Hodges v. Social Security Administration, Commissioner · filed 2019-07-17(c)

These assessments of Plaintiff’s treating physicians supported the ALJ’s holding that Plaintiff did not meet her burden of proving a severe impairment.

Section 404.1520(c) treats an impairment as nonsevere only if it does not significantly limit the claimant’s ability to perform basic work activities.

Gulan v. Heckler · filed 1984-04-05(c)

Sections 404.1520(c) and 416.920(c) of Social Security Administration Regulations Nos. 4 and 16, respectively, 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1520(c) and 416.920(c), provide that if an individual does not have any impairments which significantly limit physical or mental ability to do basic work activities, a finding shall be made that the individual does not have a severe impairment and, therefore, is not disabled regardless of age, education, and work experience. ... For the reasons stated, the ALJ’s findings that the plaintiff does not suffer from any impairment which would significantly limit his ability to perform basic work activities and consequently is not “disabled” for purposes of the Supplementary Security Income claim is not based on substantial evidence, and is therefore reversed and re: manded.

Section 404.1520(c) denies benefits at step two when an impairment is not severe, meaning it does not significantly limit the claimant’s ability to perform basic work activities.

Martin v. Margaret M. Heckler, Secretary of Health and Human Services, Defendant · filed 1984-12-17(c)

We find that the Estran-Brady-Chico formulation of the step 2 non-severity elimination test is correct and accords with the Secretary’s understanding of her own regulations. Moreover, it accords with the text of 42 U.S.C. § 423(d), quoted at I, supra, which does not state an absolute severity requirement. Finally, it is consistent with the apparent meaning of “significantly limit ... basic work activities” as stated in 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520(c) (1984).

Section 404.1520(c) requires the disability evaluation to continue when the evidence does not support a finding that the claimant’s mental impairment is nonsevere.

Arroyo v. Secretary of Health & Human Services · filed 1985-12-18(c)

Given plaintiff’s unchallenged diagnosis of a moderately severe to severe depressive disorder, and the effect on his judgment and personal relations, the Secretary’s findings of no severe impairment are unsupported by substantial evidence. ... We thus REVERSE and REMAND this case for the Secretary to continue its disability determination pursuant to 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520.

At step two, an impairment is not severe if it does not significantly limit the claimant’s ability to perform basic work activities, regardless of age, education, or work experience.

Barfield v. Barnhart · filed 2002-08-08(c)

An impairment, or combination of impairments, will not be considered severe if it “does not significantly limit [a claimant’s] physical or mental ability to do basic work activities,” without consideration of age, education, or work experience.

Section 404.1520(c) requires a finding of no disability when no impairment or combination of impairments significantly limits the claimant’s ability to do basic work activities.

Hurley v. Barnhart · filed 2005-02-23(c)

Second, if a claimant does not have any impairment or combination of impairments which significantly limit his or her physical or mental ability to do basic work activities, then she does not have a severe impairment and is not disabled.

Section 404.1520(c) permits rejecting an impairment at the severity step when the record shows no limitation on basic work activities.

Leslie v. Astrue · filed 2009-03-11(c)

The administrative law judge (ALJ) did not err in determining that Leslie’s carpal tunnel syndrome was not a medically determinable impairment. As the ALJ noted, the record reflects no evidence that the condition limited Leslie’s ability to do basic work. See 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520(c).

Section 404.1520(c) requires consideration of impairment severity at step two, but an error at that step is harmless when the decision proceeds through later steps and the claimant’s substantial rights are unaffected.

Noble v. Astrue · filed 2011-06-14(c)

Rulings of the Fifth Circuit have clarified that Stone does not require remand just because the ALJ failed to reference the Stone standard. ... The same result is required in the instant action. Whether or not the ALJ applied the correct severity standard, he found in favor of plaintiff at step two, and proceeded through the remaining steps of the analysis. As in Chaparro, the ALJ’s determination rested on an inquiry “largely unaffected by the test set forth in Stone,” id., rendering that argument irrelevant to the disposition of plaintiffs case. The court thus rejects the recommendation of the magistrate judge to remand the case on that basis. ... Therefore, the court concludes that even if the court were to assume that the Stone standard was not properly applied by the ALJ, such a failure was harmless.

Under subsection (c), an impairment is severe only if it is more than a slight abnormality expected to interfere with the claimant’s ability to work.

Lederman v. Astrue · filed 2011-11-03(c)

The Stone court also held that it would assume that the ALJ applied the incorrect legal standard to the severity requirement unless the correct standard was set forth by reference to the Stone opinion or another of the same effect, or by an express statement that the Court’s construction of section 404.1520(c) was used. Stone, 752 F.2d at 1106. ... In the case at bar, the ALJ clearly committed a Stone error because he did not expressly cite Stone, nor did he refer to another opinion of the same effect.

Section 404.1520(c) requires an impairment to significantly limit a claimant’s ability to do basic work activities to be considered severe.

Meyerpeter v. Astrue · filed 2012-10-05(c)

To be considered severe, an impairment must significantly limit a claimant’s ability to do basic work activities. See 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520(c).

Section 404.1520(c) does not require an ALJ to assess the severity of an alleged impairment when no medically determinable impairment has been established.

Brown v. Colvin · filed 2013-08-27(c)

The absence of a finding of a medical-determinable organic mental disorder renders moot any argument concerning the severity standard the ALJ applied to any such impairment. Having found no medically-determinable impairment, the ALJ was required to go no further.

Section 404.1520(c) requires a step two determination, based solely on medical factors, whether an impairment significantly limits basic work activities.

Oscar L. SEWELL, Jr., Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Margaret M. HECKLER, Secretary, Department of Health and Human Services, D · filed 1985-06-27(c)

In Estran, this Court construed the current regulations as setting the following standard in determining whether a claimant’s impairment is severe: “ ‘[A]n impairment can be considered as not severe only if it is a slight abnormality which has such minimal effect on the individual that it would not be expected to interfere with the individual’s ability to work, irrespective of age, education or work experience.’ ” 745 F.2d at 341 (quoting Brady v. Heckler, 724 F.2d 914, 920 (11th Cir.1984)). ... Because the record indicates that the AU applied the wrong legal standard in determining that the disability claimant's impairments were not severe, we vacate the order of the district court dismissing Sewell’s action and remand to the district court with instructions to remand the case to the Secretary for reconsideration of the facts in light of this Court’s opinion in Stone.

Section 404.1520(c) makes a severe impairment the threshold for continuing the disability evaluation beyond step two.

Royce v. Department of Health & Human Services · filed 1985-08-16(c)

But we think that the Magistrate’s narrow construction of severity was not necessarily founded upon such vocational factors, but rather upon considerations of general activities applicable to various types of work. In all events, we agree with the Magistrate’s narrow definitional approach taken as to the severity test, and do not regard that construction to be at odds with the rulings of the Tenth Circuit as to the scope of the severity determination. Accordingly, we reject the contention that the Magistrate applied improper standards here.

Section 404.1520(b)-(c) treats an impairment as severe when it has more than a minimal effect on a claimant’s ability to work and requires the sequential evaluation to continue accordingly.

L.G. CAULDER, Jr., Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Otis R. BOWEN, Secretary of Health and Human Services, Defendant-Appellee · filed 1986-06-17(b)-(c)

The evidence could substantiate Caulder’s assertion that he has a severe impairment, or that his combination of impairments presents more than “a slight abnormality which has such minimal effect on the individual that it would not be expected to interfere with the individual’s ability to work, irrespective of age, education, or work experience.” Brady v. Heckler, 724 F.2d 914, 920 (11th Cir. 1984); 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520(b)-(c).

Subsection (c) treats an impairment as severe only when it significantly limits the claimant’s ability to perform basic work activities.

Hey v. Colvin · filed 2015-09-30(c)

To be “severe,” an impairment must significantly limit the ability of the individual to perform basic work activities. 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1520(c), 416.920(C). ... The ,ALJ therefore did not err in determining Hey’s migraines were treatable and non-severe.

At step two, an impairment must significantly limit a claimant’s ability to do basic work activities to be severe; without a severe impairment, the claimant is not disabled.

Blough · filed 2026-03-03(c)

At step two of the sequential evaluation process, the ALJ considers whether a claimant has an impairment, or combination of impairments, that is severe. See 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520(a)(4)(ii). ... As such, Plaintiff did not meet her burden of showing that her impairments were severe prior to her date last insured.

Section 404.1520(f) directs the ALJ to assess whether a claimant's residual functional capacity permits performance of past relevant work by considering that work's physical and mental demands.

Rosa v. Astrue · filed 2010-04-28(f)

The ALJ will review a claimant's residual functional capacity and the physical and mental demands of the work the claimant has done in the past. ... The court has found above that the ALJ's determination of Plaintiff's RFC is supported by substantial evidence. ... The ALJ made explicit findings as to the physical demands of Plaintiff's past relevant work and compared these demands with Plaintiff's capabilities. ... As such, the court finds that the ALJ was not required to obtain the testimony of a vocational expert and that the ALJ's finding that Plaintiff can perform her past relevant work as an office assistant is based on substantial evidence and is consistent with the Regulations and case law.

Section 404.1520(d) presumes a claimant disabled when an impairment meets or medically equals a listed impairment.

Shannon v. Saul · filed 2020-11-30(d)

The SSA’s regulations provide that a claimant is presumed disabled if he has an impairment that meets or equals an impairment found in the Listing of Impairments. 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520(d); 20 C.F.R. Pt. 404, Subpt. P, App. 1. ... The ALJ failed to explain why, despite finding that Plaintiff would have one-to-two sleep attacks per day, Plaintiff did not satisfy the standards of Listing 11.02(B), which only requires dyscognitive seizures occurring at least once a week. Without an explanation, the court cannot say that substantial evidence supports the ALJ’s determination that Plaintiff did not meet or medically equal a listing or that his discussion of the listings was sufficient. Accordingly, this matter must be remanded.

Section 404.1520(d) treats a claimant as disabled at step three when the claimant’s impairment meets or medically equals a listed impairment.

Gleason v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2020-04-16(d)

“Under a theory of presumptive disability, a claimant is eligible for benefits if [he] has an impairment that meets or equals an impairment found in the Listing of Impairments.” Barnett v. Barnhart, 381 F.3d 664, 668 (7th Cir. 2004) (citing 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520(d); 20 C.F.R Part 404, Subpart P, App’x 1)). “The listings specify the criteria for impairments that are considered presumptively disabling.” Id. (citing 20 C.F.R. § 404.1525(a)). To meet or equal a listed impairment, a claimant must satisfy all of the criteria of the listed impairment. See Ribaudo v. Barnhart, 458 F.3d 580, 583 (7th Cir. 2006); Maggard v. Apfel, 167 F.3d 376, 380 (7th Cir. 1999). The claimant bears the burden of proving his condition meets or equals a listed impairment. Ribaudo, 458 F.3d at 583; Maggard, 167 F.3d at 380.

Section 404.1520(a)(4)(iii) requires the claimant at step three of the sequential evaluation to establish that the impairment meets or equals a listed impairment.

Abrego v. Berryhill · filed 2020-11-30(a)(4)(iii)

The claimant bears the burden of proof on the first four steps, and then the burden shifts to the Commissioner on the fifth step to show that the claimant can perform other substantial work in the national economy.” Id. Once the Commissioner makes that showing, the burden shifts back to the claimant to rebut the finding. Id. The impairment must be proven through medically accepted clinical and laboratory diagnostic techniques. 42 U.S.C. § 423(d)(3). Thus, at step three, Plaintiff bears the burden to establish that her mental impairments satisfied the criteria necessary to meet one of the listings. 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1520(a)(4)(iii), (d); 416.920(a)(4)(iii), (d).

At step three, a claimant is presumed disabled if the impairment or combination of impairments meets or equals a listed impairment.

Fries v. Saul · filed 2021-03-03(d)

If a claimant is found to have “an impairment or combination of impairments that meets or equals a condition outlined in the ‘Listing of Impairments,’ then the claimant is presumed disabled at step three [of the sequential process], and the ALJ need not make any specific finding as to his or her ability to perform past relevant work or any other jobs.”

Section 404.1520(d) treats a claimant who meets or equals a listed impairment as disabled at step three, without requiring consideration of age, education, or work experience.

Daigneau v.Kijakazi · filed 2021-06-08(d)

If a claimant has an impairment or combination of impairments that meets or equals a condition outlined in the “Listing of Impairments,” then the claimant is presumed disabled at step three, and the ALJ need not to consider his age, education, and work experience. 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520(d). An ALJ must evaluate the relevant evidence before concluding that a claimant’s impairments do not meet or equal a listed impairment. Lewis v. Apfel, 236 F.3d 503, 512 (9th Cir. 2001). A boilerplate finding is insufficient to support a conclusion that a claimant’s impairment does not meet a listing. Id.

Section 404.1520(d) requires the ALJ at step three to determine whether the claimant’s impairment matches or is equivalent to a listed impairment presumed severe enough to preclude gainful work.

Cosme v. Commissioner Social Security · filed 2021-03-01(d)

At step three of the evaluation process, the ALJ must determine whether a claimant’s impairment matches, or is equivalent to, one of the impairments present in the listings in the federal regulations that are presumed severe enough to preclude any gainful work. 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520(d); see Burnett, 220 F.3d at 118. ... Here, the ALJ did provide a conclusory statement as to why Cosme’s cardiovascular impairment did not meet the matching listing. However, the ALJ later went on to discuss Cosme’s cardiovascular impairment in detail. Reading the decision as a whole, we find that the record and explanation of findings is developed enough to permit meaningful review and does not require remand. See Jones, 364 F.3d at 505.

Section 404.1520 establishes a five-step disability-evaluation process and treats a claimant as disabled at step three when the claimant’s impairments meet or equal a listed condition; an omitted listing analysis may be harmless when the record forecloses eligibility.

Motuzas v. US Social Security Administration, Commissioner · filed 2021-08-25(a)(4), (d)

The Commissioner has established a five-step sequential process for determining whether a claimant has made the requisite demonstration. 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520(a)(4); see also Bowen v. Yuckert, 482 U.S. 137, 140 (1987). ... A DIB claimant is considered disabled for purposes of the Act if her impairments meet or equal the criteria of the conditions listed in 20 C.F.R. Part 404, Subpart P, Appendix 1. See 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1520(d), 404.1525, 404.1526. ... The fact that Motuzas had suffered a stroke (i.e., a vascular insult to the brain) was properly before the ALJ; consequently the ALJ should have considered all of the criteria of Listing 11.04. However, the ALJ’s failure to consider the criteria of Listing 11.04C was necessarily harmless under the circumstances.

At step three of the disability evaluation, a claimant is disabled if the claimant’s impairment or combination of impairments meets or equals a listed impairment.

Hagopian v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2023-02-28(a)(4)(iii)

A claimant will be found disabled at step three of the evaluation process if the claimant has an impairment or combination of impairments that “meets or equals” a listed impairment. 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520(a)(4)(iii); see id. Pt. 404, Subpt. P, Appx. 1 (“Listing of Impairments”).

Section 404.1520(a)(4)(iii) treats meeting or medically equaling a listed impairment as presumptive disability at step three of the five-step evaluation.

Harrison v. O'Malley · filed 2025-03-31(a)(4)(iii)

The Social Security Act requires the Secretary to follow a “five-step sequential process” for claims of disability. ... Third, if plaintiff is not performing substantial gainful activity, has a severe impairment that is expected to last for at least twelve months, and the impairment meets a listed impairment, plaintiff is presumed to be disabled regardless of age, education or work experience. ... Clearly, the “third requirement” states that a claimant will be deemed presumptively disabled and eligible for benefits if his impairment meets or medically equals one of the listings in the Listing of Impairments. 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1520(a)(4)(iii), 416.920(a)(4)(iii). The present case does not involve the Listing of Impairments.

Section 404.1520(a)(4)(iii) requires the ALJ to determine at step three whether the claimant's impairment or combination of impairments meets or equals a listed impairment; meeting or equaling a listing supports a finding of disability.

Aaron · filed 2025-12-05(a)(4)(iii)

If a plaintiff has an impairment or combination of impairments that meets or equals a condition outlined in C.F.R. Part 404, Subpart P, Appendix 1, the plaintiff is presumed disabled at step three. 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520(4)(iii). ... Looking at the ALJ’s entire decision, this Court finds that the ALJ adequately discussed and evaluated evidence to support her finding that Plaintiff’s impairments or combination of impairments did not meet or equal a listing at step three.