20 C.F.R. § 404.1520

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

Randall v. Astrue · filed 2012-03-19

The SSA Commissioner has established a five-step process for determining whether a person is disabled. See 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1520, 416.920; Bowen v. Yuckert, 482 U.S. 137, 141-42, 107 S.Ct. 2287, 2291, 96 L.Ed.2d 119 (1987); Fines v. Apfel, 149 F.3d 893, 894-895 (8th Cir.1998). First, it is determined whether the claimant is currently engaged in “substantial gainful employment.” If the claimant is, disability benefits must be denied. See 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1520, 416.920(b). Step two requires a determination of whether the claimant suffers from a medically severe impairment or combination of impairments. See 20 C.F.R §§ 404.1520(c), 416.920(c).

Section 404.1520(c) defines the severity standard used at step two of the disability determination.

McNair v. Commissioner of Social Security Administration · filed 2008-03-06(c)

The ALJ’s use of “affected” is a lesser degree of severity than the literal application of the “significantly limits” language contained in the Social Security regulations. See 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520(c).

When a claimant cannot perform past work, the Secretary must determine whether the claimant can perform other work by considering age, education, past work experience, and residual functional capacity.

William B. EGGLESTON, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Otis R. BOWEN, Secretary of Health and Human Services, Defendant-Appellee · filed 1988-07-14(f)

A person whose impairment precludes performance of past work is disabled unless the Secretary demonstrates that the person can perform other work. In making this determination the Secretary must consider the claimant’s age, education, past work experience, and residual functional capacity. 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520(f).

Section 404.1520(f)(1) requires considering a claimant’s residual functional capacity, age, education, and past work experience to determine whether the claimant can perform other work after being unable to do past work because of a severe impairment.

Wright v. Larry G. Massanari, Acting Commissioner of Social Security Administration · filed 2003-03-12(f)(1)

“If you cannot do any work you have done in the past because you have a severe impairment(s), we will consider your residual functional capacity and your age, education, and past work experience to see if you can do other work. If you cannot, we will find you disabled.” 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520(f)(1). ... We conclude, however, that the ALJ invoked the proper rules for Wright’s residual functional capacity and her age, education, and work experience.

Section 404.1520(a) requires a five-step sequential evaluation, and subsection (d) treats impairments meeting the Listings as presumptively disabling.

LASTRAPE v. Barnhart · filed 2005-04-21(a), (d)

Regulations require a five-step sequential analysis for initial disability determinations. ... “The Listings” is a shorthand reference to Appendix I, Subpart P, Part 404 of the Regulations. ... Impairments found in “the Listings” are those that the Commissioner acknowledges are so severe that they automatically preclude substantial gainful activity.

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

Brewster v. SSA · filed 2002-08-02

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

Section 404.1520 provides a five-step sequential evaluation for deciding disability claims.

KULAKOSKI v. Barnhart · filed 2002-07-20

The Commissioner has promulgated a five-step analysis for evaluating disability claims. ... In this case, the ALJ adhered to the regulatory five-step sequential evaluation.

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

Kopulos v. Barnhart · filed 2002-08-22

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

Section 404.1520 requires disability claims to be evaluated through a five-step sequential process, and the agency stops once it can determine that the claimant is disabled or not disabled.

French v. Massanari · filed 2001-05-10(a)

The Social Security Administration has promulgated regulations that have defined this determination of disability as a five-step analysis. 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1520, 416.920. First, the Commissioner determines whether the claimant is currently employed. ... Fifth, the Commissioner determines whether the claimant’s age, education, and past work experience prevent the performance of any other work in the economy. Under this sequential analysis, the Commissioner’s duty ends as soon as he is capable of determining whether the claimant is disabled. ... § 404.1520(a) (“If we can find that you are disabled or not disabled at any point in the review, we do not review your claim further.”); ...

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

Stephenson v. Halter, et al. · filed 2001-06-21

When determining whether a claimant is disabled, the A L J is required to make the following five inquiries: ... (5) whether the impairment prevents the claimant from doing any other work. ... In concluding that Ms. Stephenson was not disabled within the meaning of the Act, the ALJ properly employed the mandatory five-step sequential evaluation process described in 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520.

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

Burroughs v. Massanari · filed 2001-06-25(a)

Under the regulations as promulgated by the Commissioner, a five-step sequential analysis must be followed when evaluating a disability claim. 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520(a).

Section 404.1520 requires an administrative law judge to use a five-step sequential analysis when deciding whether a claimant is disabled.

Lyons v. Social Security Administration · filed 2001-09-13

In this connection we note that an ALJ is required to follow a five-step sequential analysis set out in agency regulations.

Section 404.1520(d) ends the sequential evaluation at step three when the claimant's impairment meets or equals a listed impairment, requiring a finding of disability.

Nesvold v. Bowen · filed 1988-04-14(d)

The AU properly decided the case at level three, at which the analysis stops with a finding of disability.

Section 404.1520 requires disability determinations to proceed through five sequential questions, with specified answers determining whether the claimant is disabled.

Mary W. HINES, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Otis R. BOWEN, Secretary of Health and Human Services, Defendant-Appellee · filed 1989-03-10

The general procedure of a Social Security disability inquiry is well established. Five questions are to be asked sequentially during the course of a disability determination. 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1520, 1520a (1988). An AU must consider (1) whether the claimant is engaged in substantial gainful activity, (2) whether the claimant has a severe impairment, (3) whether the claimant has an impairment which equals a condition contained within the Social Security Administration’s official listing of impairments (at 20 C.F.R. Pt. 404, Subpart P, App. 1), (4) whether the claimant has an impairment which prevents past relevant work, and (5) whether the claimant’s impairment prevents her from any substantial gainful employment. An affirmative answer to question 1 or negative answers to questions 2 or 4 result in a determination of no disability. Affirmative answers to questions 3 or 5 establish disability. 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520.

Section 404.1520 establishes a five-step sequential evaluation process, under which meeting a listed impairment leads to a disability finding without further inquiry into the claimant’s ability to perform gainful work.

Harvey PUGH, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Otis R. BOWEN, M.D., Secretary of Health and Human Services, Defendant-Appellee · filed 1989-03-20

To determine whether a claimant is disabled within the meaning of the Act, the Secretary has developed a five-step sequential evaluation process. We have described the inquiry as follows. ... The following steps are addressed in order. (1) Is the claimant presently unemployed? (2) Is the claimant’s impairment “severe”? (3) Does the impairment meet or exceed one of a list of specific impairments? (4) Is the claimant unable to perform his or her former occupation? (5) Is the claimant able to perform any other work within the economy? ... An affirmative answer leads either to the next step, or on steps 3 and 5, to a finding that the claimant is disabled. A negative answer at any point, other than step 3, stops [the] inquiry and leads to a determination that the claimant is not disabled. 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520.

Section 404.1520 establishes a five-step process for determining whether an individual is disabled.

West v. Bowen · filed 1989-08-31(a)

Pursuant to statutory authority, 42 U.S.C. §§ 423(d)(4), 1382c(a)(3)(D), the Secretary has promulgated regulations for determining whether an individual is disabled. 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1520(a)-(f), 416.960(a)-(f). The Secretary employs a five-step process to determine whether Claimant is disabled within the meaning of the Act.

Section 404.1520 requires disability claims to be evaluated through five sequential steps, with disability resulting at Steps 3 or 5 and a finding of nondisability when the claimant fails at another step.

Willie B. ANDERSON, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Otis R. BOWEN, M.D., Secretary of Health and Human Services, Defendant-Appel · filed 1989-02-14

Social Security regulations prescribe a sequential inquiry to be followed in determining whether a claimant is disabled. The following steps are addressed in order: (1) Is the claimant presently unemployed? (2) Is the claimant’s impairment "severe?” (3) Does the impairment meet or exceed one of the impairments listed at Appendix 1 of the Secretary’s Regulations? (4) Is the claimant unable to perform his or her former occupation? (5) Is the claimant unable to perform any other work within the economy in view of the claimant's age, education, past work experience and residual functional capacity? An affirmative answer leads either to the next step, or, on Steps 3 and 5, to a finding that the claimant is disabled. A negative answer at any point, other than Step 3, ends the inquiry and leads to a determination that a claimant is not disabled.

Section 404.1520 requires a five-step evaluation, including whether an impairment prevents the applicant from performing past relevant work or other work for which the applicant is qualified.

Taylor v. Secretary of Health and Human Services · filed 1989-12-20

In processing Taylor's claim, the Social Security Administration properly followed a five step evaluation set forth at 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520. The dispute here concerns the fourth and fifth steps which provide that the impairment must prevent the applicant from performing any past relevant work or other work for which the applicant is qualified.

Section 404.1520 requires disability claims to be evaluated through a five-step sequential inquiry, with a negative answer generally ending the inquiry and a positive answer advancing the inquiry or establishing disability at steps three and five.

Naydihor v. Sullivan · filed 1990-08-02

Social Security regulations prescribe a sequential inquiry to be followed in determining whether a claimant is disabled. The following steps are addressed in order: (1) Is the claimant presently unemployed? (2) Is the claimant’s impairment “severe”? (3) Does the impairment meet or exceed one of the list of specific impairments? (4) Is the claimant unable to perform his or her former occupation? (5) Is the claimant unable to perform any other work within the economy? An affirmative answer leads either to the next step or, on steps 3 and 5, to a finding that the claimant is disabled. A negative answer at any point, other than step 3, stops [the] inquiry and leads to a determination that the claimant is not disabled.

Section 404.1520 establishes a five-step sequential evaluation for disability determinations, including whether a claimant can perform past work or other work in the national economy.

Hudacek v. Sullivan · filed 1990-09-19(a)

Disability determinations are made pursuant to a five-step sequential evaluation procedure. 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520(a)-(f). First, the claimant must not be performing-substantial gainful activity. Second, the claimant must have a severe, medically determinable impairment. Third, a claimant will be found disabled if his or her impairment is equal in severity to a listed impairment in 20 C.F.R. Subpart P, Appendix 1. Fourth, if the claimant does not meet the third test, he/she must not be able to perform his/her past work. Fifth, if the claimant cannot perform his/her past work, he or she must not be able to perform any existing jobs available in the national economy given his or her educational background, vocational history and residual functional capacity.

At step three, lack of control over drinking or drug use does not automatically establish disability; the claimant must still be evaluated for inability to engage in substantial gainful activity.

Schoolcraft v. Sullivan · filed 1991-01-03(d)

Under step three of the five-step evaluation process, however, the Secretary does not automatically award disability benefits whenever a claimant evidences a lack of control over drinking or drug use, but rather goes on to consider whether the claimant, under the totality of circumstances, is unable to engage in substantial gainful employment.

Section 404.1520 establishes a five-step sequential evaluation process for disability claims; the process ends when disability or non-disability is determined at a step, with the claimant bearing the burden through step four and the Secretary thereafter.

Bonita B. Flowers v. Louis W. Sullivan, M.D., Secretary of Health and Human Services · filed 1992-04-14

The Secretary has established a five-step sequential evaluation process to determine if a claimant is disabled. Reyes v. Bowen, 845 F.2d 242, 243 (10th Cir.1988) (listing five steps); 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520 (1991). If a claimant is determined to be disabled or not disabled at any step, the evaluation process ends there. Sorenson v. Bowen, 888 F.2d 706, 710 (10th Cir.1989). The burden of proof is on the claimant through step four; then it shifts to the Secretary. See id. at 710 (citing Ray v. Bowen, 865 F.2d 222, 224 (10th Cir.1989) ).

Section 404.1520 requires disability claims to be evaluated through a five-step process, with the burden shifting at step five to the Secretary to show that the claimant can perform other work existing in the economy.

Jerry L. White, Jr. v. Louis W. Sullivan, M.D., Secretary of Health and Human Services · filed 1992-05-13

In order to determine whether a claimant is under a disability, the Secretary applies a five-step process. 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1520, 416.920; see Williams v. Bowen, 844 F.2d 748, 750-52 (10th Cir.1988) (providing an in-depth discussion of the five steps). The ALJ's decisions regarding the first four steps, (1) that Claimant was not engaged in substantial gainful activity, (2) that Claimant has a severe impairment, (3) that Claimant's impairments are not listed in, or equal to, the impairments listed in Appendix 1, Subpart P, Regulation No. 4, and (4) that Claimant is not able to perform his past relevant work, are not at issue here. However, at step five, the burden shifts to the Secretary to prove that Claimant retains the capacity to perform alternate work and whether that work exists in the local and national economies. See id. at 751.

Section 404.1520(f) makes disability determination part of a five-step sequential evaluation that rationally and fairly determines whether the claimant can engage in substantial gainful activity in the national economy, considering age, education, work experience, and impairments.

Lashen v. Secretary of Health and Human Services · filed 1993-09-15(f)

The goal of the five-step sequential evaluation mandated by the regulations is the rational and fair determination of whether the claimant meets the underlying statutory test for disability, i.e., whether considering the claimant's age, education and work experience, the claimant's impairments have rendered him unable to engage in substantial gainful activity existing in the national economy. Skinner v. Secretary of Health and Human Serv., 902 F.2d 447, 450 (6th Cir.1990); 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520(f).

Section 404.1520 requires disability claims to be evaluated through five questions in a specific order: current work, severity, listed impairment, past relevant work, and other work.

Atkins v. Shalala · filed 1993-11-17(a)

The Social Security Act requires that certain individuals who are “under a disability” shall receive disability benefits. 42 U.S.C. § 423(a)(1)(D). Since 1978, the Secretary has implemented the statutory definition of disability by applying a five-step sequential inquiry into whether or not an applicant for benefits should be considered “disabled” and thus eligible for benefits. 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520. Known as “sequential analysis,” this system is comprised of elements of both the medical and vocational requirements of the definition of disability. It consists of a series of five questions asked in a specific order. These questions involve 1) whether the claimant is currently working; 2) whether the impairment is severe; 3) whether the impairment meets or equals a listed impairment; 4) whether the impairment prevents the claimant from performing past relevant work; and 5) whether the impairment prevents the claimant from doing any other work. 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520(a)-(f).

Section 404.1520(a) requires disability claims to be evaluated through five sequential steps: substantial gainful activity, severe impairment, listed impairment, past relevant work, and other work in the national economy considering the claimant’s vocational factors and residual functional capacity.

Halsted v. Shalala · filed 1994-02-15(a)

The Secretary has provided the ÁLJ with a five-step sequential analysis to use when evaluating the disabled status of each claimant. 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520(a). The ALJ must determine: (1) whether the claimant is currently engaged in substantial gainful activity; (2) if not, whether the claimant has a severe impairment; (3) if the claimant has a substantial impairment, whether it meets or equals the criteria listed in 20 C.F.R., pt. 404, subpt. P., app. 1; (4) if the impairment does not satisfy one of the impairment listings, whether the claimant’s impairments prevent him from performing his past relevant work; and (5) if the claimant is incapable of performing his past relevant work, whether he can perform any other work which exists in the national economy, in light of his age, education, work experience and residual functional capacity. 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520.

Section 404.1520 requires a five-step sequential evaluation of disability claims: substantial gainful activity, severe impairment, listed impairment, past work, and alternative work, with the claimant bearing the burden through the fourth step and the Secretary bearing it at the final step.

Koseck v. Secretary of Health and Human Services · filed 1994-10-18(b)-(f)

The federal regulations set forth a five step analysis that the Secretary must follow in determining eligibility for disability insurance benefits. 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1520, 416.920 (1993). ... The next step is to determine whether the applicant has a severe impairment which significantly limits his or her physical or mental ability to do basic work activities, as defined in the regulations. 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1520(c), 416.920(c). Absent an impairment, the applicant is not eligible for disability benefits. ... However, as a fourth step, if the impairment or its equivalent is not listed in Appendix 1, the Secretary must then consider the applicant’s “residual functional capacity” and the demands of any past work. 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1520(e), 416.920(e). If the applicant can still perform work he has done in the past, the applicant will be denied disability benefits. ... Finally, if the applicant is unable to perform any past work, the Secretary will consider the individual’s “residual functional capacity,” age, education and past work experience in order to determine whether the applicant can perform any alternative employment. 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1520(f), 416.920(f). ... The applicant bears the burden of proof as to the first four steps, while the Secretary bears the burden of proof on the final step relating to other employment.

Section 404.1520 requires disability determinations to proceed through a five-step sequential inquiry addressing unemployment, severity, listed impairments, past work, and other work in the national economy.

Cunningham v. Shalala · filed 1995-03-10

The Social Security Regulations outline a five-step inquiry to be followed when determining whether a claimant is disabled: (1) is the claimant presently unemployed; (2) is the claimant’s impairment or combination of impairments severe; (3) does the impairment meet or exceed any of the list of specific impairments that the Secretary acknowledges to be so severe as to preclude substantial gainful activity; (4) if the impairment has not been listed by the Secretary as conclusively disabling, is the claimant unable to perform his or her former occupation; and (5) if the claimant cannot perform the past occupation, is the claimant unable to perform other work in the national economy.

Section 404.1520(f)(1) requires determining whether a claimant who cannot perform past work can perform other work in the national economy, considering the claimant’s age, education, and work experience.

Lannie v. Shalala · filed 1995-03-31(f)(1)

If the claimant cannot perform this work, the ... final step of the process determines whether he is able to perform other work in the national economy in view of his age, education, and work experience. The claimant is entitled to disability benefits only if he is not able to perform other work.

Section 404.1520 establishes a five-step disability-evaluation framework under which, after the claimant satisfies the first four steps, the burden shifts to the Secretary to show that other jobs exist that the claimant can perform.

Jeffrey BATES, Appellant, v. Shirley S. CHATER, Commissioner of Social Security, Appellee · filed 1995-05-16

It is uncontested that under the five-step burden-shifting framework set forth in 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520, the first four elements were met: Bates had not engaged in substantial gainful employment since his injury, he had a serious impairment, he did not meet the criteria of a listed presumptive disability, and he was unable to return to his past relevant work. Thus, the burden shifted to the Secretary to show that there are other jobs in the local and national economy that Bates can perform.

Section 404.1520 requires a five-step sequential evaluation of disability claims, with the claimant bearing the burden through the first four steps and the Secretary bearing it at the final step.

Manns v. Shalala · filed 1995-05-26(b)-(f)

The applicable regulations set up a five step analysis that the Secretary must follow in determining eligibility for supplemental security income benefits. 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1520, 416.920 (1994). ... The applicant bears the burden of proof as to the first four steps, while the Secretary bears the burden of proof on the final step relating to other employment.

Section 404.1520 requires disability claims to be evaluated through five sequential steps, and a finding of nondisability at any step ends the evaluation.

Eichelberger v. Chater · filed 1995-10-17

In evaluating a claim of disability, the Commissioner uses the following five-step process to determine whether (1) the claimant is not presently working; (2) the claimant’s ability to work is significantly limited by a severe physical or mental impairment; (3) the impairment meets or equals an impairment listed in the appendix to the regulations; (4) the impairment prevents the claimant from doing past relevant work; and (5) the impairment prevents the claimant from performing any other substantial gainful activity. 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1520, 416.920 (1993); Muse v. Sullivan, 925 F.2d 785, 789 (5th Cir. 1991). A finding that a claimant is not disabled at any point terminates the sequential evaluation. Crouchet v. Sullivan, 885 F.2d 202, 206 (5th Cir. 1989).

Section 404.1520 requires an ALJ to use a five-step sequential evaluation process when assessing disability allegations, including determining whether the claimant can perform other work existing in significant numbers in the national economy.

Giancola v. Shalala · filed 1996-01-29(f)

In assessing allegations of disability, the ALJ must follow the five-step sequential evaluation process outlined in the regulations at 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520 and 416.920. In following this process, the ALJ must determine whether: ... 5) the Secretary has carried its burden of proving that a significant number of jobs exist in the national economy that the claimant could perform, given his impairments, residual functional capacity, age, education, and past work experience.

Section 404.1520 requires disability claims to be evaluated through a five-step sequential process, with the claimant bearing the burden through the first four steps and the burden shifting at step five.

Ferguson v. Secretary of HHS · filed 1996-02-02

The regulations require a five-step sequential evaluation process for disability determinations. 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520 (1986). Plaintiff bears the burden of proof on the first four steps.

Section 404.1520(a) establishes a five-step sequential process requiring a claimant to show the absence of substantial gainful activity, a severe impairment, a listed impairment, inability to perform past relevant work, and inability to perform other work existing in significant numbers nationally.

Wilson v. Chater · filed 1996-02-15(a)

A five-step analysis exists for evaluating a claimant's application for disability benefits. ... Those steps require the claimant to show that he: (1) is not engaged in substantial gainful activity; (2) has a medically severe impairment which precludes engaging in substantial gainful activity; or (3) has an impairment which meets the listing in the regulations; (4) is unable to return to past relevant work; and (5) is unable to engage in other positions which exist in significant numbers throughout the national economy. As the ALJ found, Wilson has not demonstrated that he has a medically severe impairment.

Section 404.1520 requires a five-step sequential analysis of disability claims, under which a claimant who can perform past relevant work is not disabled.

Gaddis v. Chater · filed 1996-02-16

The ALJ analyzed the case by following the five-step analysis mandated by 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520 (1995). ... Under the five-step analysis of social security cases, when a claimant can perform his past relevant work, he is not disabled.

Section 404.1520 requires the Commissioner to use a five-step sequential procedure to determine whether a claimant is eligible for disability benefits.

Williams v. Chater · filed 1996-01-31

The Commissioner employs a five-step procedure to determine whether a claimant is eligible for disability benefits within the meaning of the Act. 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520 (1995).

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

Cline v. Shirley S. Chater, Commissioner of Social Security · filed 1996-04-19

The Commissioner's regulations lay out a five step sequential evaluation process for making disability determinations under the Act. 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520 (1995); Hunter v. Sullivan, 993 F.2d 31, 34-35 (4th Cir.1992). The claimant bears the burden of satisfying the first four steps; if the claimant reaches the fifth step, the burden shifts to the Commissioner to produce evidence that other jobs exist in significant numbers in the economy that the claimant can perform considering his age, education, work experience, and remaining physical and mental capabilities. See, e.g., Hunter, 993 F.2d at 35; Hall v. Harris, 658 F.2d 260, 264-65 (4th Cir.1981).

Section 404.1520 establishes a five-step sequential process for deciding disability claims, with the Commissioner bearing the burden at step five to show that a claimant who cannot return to past work can perform other available work based on the claimant’s age, education, work experience, and residual functional capacity.

Claussen v. Chater · filed 1996-10-29

The Regulations provide for a five-step sequential evaluation of an individual’s claim for disability insurance benefits and supplemental security income benefits. ... If a claimant demonstrates an inability to resume his or her former occupation, the evaluation moves to step five. At this final stage, the burden of proof shifts to the Commissioner, who must demonstrate the claimant is capable of performing other available work in order to deny a claim of disability. ... Further, an ALJ’s determination of disability at step five must be based on the claimant’s age, education, work experience and residual functional capacity.

Section 404.1520 requires a five-step sequential analysis to determine whether a claimant is disabled.

Winns v. Chater · filed 1996-11-21

First, we find that the ALJ applied the appropriate legal standard. The ALJ conducts a five-step sequential analysis in determining whether a claimant is disabled: 1) is the claimant is presently working; 2) does the claimant have a severe impairment; 3) is the impairment listed, or equivalent to an impairment listed in Appendix 1 of the Regulations; 4) does the impairment prevent the claimant from performing past relevant work; and 5) does the impairment prevent the claimant from performing any other substantial gainful activity.

Section 404.1520 requires disability claims to be evaluated through a sequential five-step process, with the first three steps serving as threshold tests before proceeding to past or other work.

Santos v. Chater · filed 1996-09-30

In determining whether the claimant is disabled, the Commissioner must use a sequential five-step analysis. ... The first three questions are “threshold” tests. If the claimant is working (question one) or if he has the physical or mental capacity to perform basic work-related functions (question two), he is automatically considered not disabled. Conversely, if the claimant has an Appendix 1-type impairment (question three), he is automatically considered disabled. In either case, the claim is determined at the “threshold.” Alternatively, if the claimant’s ability to perform basic work-related functions is impaired significantly but not to the extent of an Appendix 1-type impairment, the Commissioner proceeds to the fourth and, if necessary, fifth questions.

Section 404.1520 establishes a five-step sequential evaluation of disability; a claimant may be found not disabled at any step, and the Secretary bears the burden at step five only after the claimant clears the first four steps.

Parham v. Chater · filed 1997-04-30

There is a sequential five-step process for determining whether an individual has a disability covered under the Act. 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520 (1996). Plaintiff may be found to be “not disabled” at any of the five stages of this review. ... Both Judge Taggart and Judge Sullivan, the administrative law judges in this case, found that Plaintiff does not have an impairment or combination of impairments which meet the listing in Appendix 1 and, therefore, that Plaintiff does not meet the requirement of the third step of this test. ... Although the Plaintiff has failed to satisfy the third step of the test used to evaluate disability claims, and is therefore considered “not disabled,” this Court addresses the burden of proof argument because it was considered by one of the administrative law judges in this ease. Plaintiff argues that the Defendant has not met the burden in step five of the analysis, where, if all four of the previous steps are successfully addressed by Plaintiff, the Secretary must show that an individual, “based upon his or her age, education, work experience, and residual functional capacity, is capable of performing gainful work” to prove that the individual is not disabled. ... The Secretary has met the burden in step five by showing that Plaintiffs age and education are not serious impediments to his gainful employment.

Section 404.1520 establishes a five-step sequential process for determining whether a claimant is disabled, including evaluation of work activity, impairment severity, listed impairments, past work, and other work in the national economy.

Grebenick v. Chater · filed 1997-08-06

The five-step sequential evaluation process set forth at 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1520 and 416.920 guides our inquiry: "First the [Commissioner] determines whether the claimant is presently engaged in a `substantial gainful activity.' Second the [Commissioner] analyzes whether the claimant has a severe impairment -- one that significantly limits the claimant's physical or mental ability to perform basic work activities. Third, the [Commissioner] determines whether the claimant has an impairment that meets or equals an impairment listed in the regulations; if so, the [Commissioner] finds that the claimant is disabled without considering the claimant's age, education and work experience. Fourth, the [Commissioner] considers the claimant's residual functional capacity and the physical and mental demands of the claimant's past work to determine whether the claimant can still perform the work. If the claimant has the residual capacity to perform that work, the [Commissioner] finds that the claimant is not disabled. Finally, if the [Commissioner] determined that the claimant cannot perform the past work, the [Commissioner] determines whether any substantial gainful activity exists in the national economy which the claimant can perform."

Section 404.1520(f) requires the fifth step to determine whether a claimant can perform any work, considering residual functional capacity, age, education, and past work experience.

Bolton v. Callahan · filed 1997-09-19(f)

The initial determination to be made at this step is if the severe impairment prevents the Plaintiff from performing any work, even sedentary. This step incorporates consideration of the residual functional capacity, age, education and past work experience of the Plaintiff, 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520(f). If the Plaintiff is capable of performing some level of work, then at this juncture the decisions must also be made as to whether (1) the severe impairments are exertional, non-exer-tional or a combination of exertional and non-exertional, and (2) the Plaintiff can perform a full range of the indicated work level.

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

Little v. Apfel · filed 1998-02-23

The ALJ employs a five-step analysis to determine whether a claimant is disabled. At step 1, a claimant must not be working or engaging in substantial gainful activity. At step 2, a claimant is not disabled if he or she does not have a severe impairment. At step 3, a claimant is considered disabled if his or her severe impairment meets or equals an impairment listed in Appendix One of the regulations. At step 4, a claimant will be considered not disabled if he can perform past relevant work. At step 5, if the claimant cannot perform past relevant work, other factors, such as post-work experience and residual functional capacity, are considered to determine if work found in the national economy can be performed, in which case the claimant is considered not disabled.

Section 404.1520 establishes a five-step sequence for deciding disability: affirmative answers generally advance the inquiry or establish disability at steps 3 or 5, while negative answers generally end it with a finding of no disability.

Moomey v. Apfel · filed 1998-05-05

The factual determination is made using a five-step test. 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1520. The steps are examined as follows: ... An affirmative answer at any Step leads either to the next Step, or in the case of Steps 3 and 5 to a finding that the claimant is disabled. A negative answer at any point, other than Step 3, stops the inquiry and leads to a determination that the claimant is not disabled.

Section 404.1520 requires disability claims to be evaluated through a five-step sequential process, ending with the Commissioner’s burden at step five to show that the claimant can perform other work in the national economy.

Ridge v. Apfel · filed 1998-07-31

The Commissioner has established a five-step sequential evaluation process for determining whether a claimant is disabled. ... In the fourth step, the claimant must come forward with proof that the impairment prevents work of a type the claimant has performed in the past. ... Once a claimant establishes a prima facie case of disability, the burden shifts to the Commissioner to show in the fifth and final step that the claimant has the residual functional capacity (RFC) to perform other work in the national economy in view of his age, education and work experience.

Section 404.1520 requires an ALJ to use a five-step sequential analysis, including deciding at step four whether the claimant can perform past relevant work and at step five whether the claimant can perform other work.

Lord v. SSA · filed 1998-06-14(e), (f)

In determining whether a claimant is disabled, an ALJ must use a five-step sequential analysis.3 See 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520 (1997). At step four, the ALJ determines whether the claimant's impairment prevents him from performing his past relevant work. Id. § 404.1520(e); Dudley v. Secretary of Health and Human Servs., 816 F.2d 792, 793 (1st Cir. 1987).

Section 404.1520 requires disability claims to be evaluated through a five-step sequence, including determining at step three whether the impairment meets or equals a listed impairment and at step four whether it prevents past relevant work.

Spear v. Social Security Admin. · filed 1998-06-05(d), (e)

At step three of the seguential analysis, the ALJ evaluates the claimant's condition under the criteria described in the SSA regulations at 20 C.F.R. Part 404, Subpart P, Appendix 1 ("Appendix 1"). See 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520(d). ... Once an ALJ has determined that the claimant's impairment does not meet or egual the criteria of a listed impairment, the ALJ proceeds to step four of the five-step seguential evaluation. See Dudley, 816 F.2d at 794; 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520(e). At step four, the ALJ determines whether the claimant's impairment prevents him from performing his past relevant work. See id.

Section 404.1520 requires disability claims to be evaluated through a five-step sequential process, including whether the claimant can perform past relevant work or other work existing in significant numbers.

Burns v. Apfel · filed 1998-07-20

In evaluating claims for disability benefits the ALJ must conduct a five-step sequential evaluation: (1) is the claimant engaged in substantial gainful activity; (2) does that claimant have severe impairments; (3) does the impairment or combination of impairments meet or equal an impairment listed in Appendix 1; (4) does the impairment or combination of impairments prevent the claimant from doing past relevant work; (5) does the impairment or combination of impairments prevent the claimant from doing other work which exists in significant numbers in the national economy. 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520.

Section 404.1520 establishes a five-step sequential disability evaluation; at step four, the claimant bears the burden of showing inability to perform past relevant work, and vocational-expert analysis is generally reached only after that showing.

Swanick v. SSA · filed 1998-11-25

The ALJ is required to consider the following five steps when determining if a claimant is disabled: (1) whether the claimant is engaged in substantial gainful activity at the time of the claim; (2) whether the claimant has a severe impairment that has lasted for twelve months or had a severe impairment for a period of twelve months in the past; (3) whether the impairment meets or equals a listed impairment; (4) whether the impairment prevents or prevented the claimant from performing past relevant work; (5) whether the impairment prevents or prevented the claimant from doing any other work. 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520 (1997). ... It is the plaintiff, however, who bears the burden at step four of the sequential process. ... Thus, there was no need for the ALJ to call a vocational expert in this case because he decided the case before reaching step five of the analysis.

Section 404.1520 requires the SSA to determine disability through a five-step process, including deciding at step five whether the claimant can perform work available in significant numbers in the national economy.

Wiggins v. Apfel · filed 1998-12-10

Step five requires the ALJ to determine if, considering age, education, and work experience, the claimant can perform work available in significant numbers in the national economy. § 404.1520. ... The ALJ failed to set forth all of Wiggins’ impairments in his hypothetical to the VE; an error which in and of itself demonstrates a lack of substantial evidence supporting the ALJ’s conclusion that Wiggins could work as a messenger or office cleaner. Additionally, when Wiggins’ attorney rectified the ALJ’s omission, the VE testified that a person with limitations similar to Wiggins’ could not sustain any gainful activity. This Court concludes, therefore, that the ALJ’s determination at step five was not supported by substantial record evidence.

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

Labrie v. SSA · filed 1999-01-07

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

Section 404.1520 requires disability claims to be evaluated through five sequential steps, including whether the claimant can perform past relevant work and other work available in the national economy.

Brunei v. SSA · filed 1999-01-26

The ALJ is required to consider the following five steps when determining if a claimant is disabled: (1) whether the claimant is engaged in substantial gainful activity at the time of the claim; (2) whether the claimant has a severe impairment that has lasted for twelve months or had a severe impairment for a period of twelve months in the past; (3) whether the impairment meets or equals a listed impairment; (4) whether the impairment prevents or prevented the claimant from performing past relevant work; (5) whether the impairment prevents or prevented the claimant from doing any other work. 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520 (1998).

Section 404.1520 establishes a five-step sequential process for evaluating disability claims, ending with whether the claimant can perform other work.

Rosa v. John S. Callahan, Acting Commissioner of Social Security · filed 1999-02-05

The Social Security Administration (the “SSA”) has promulgated a five step procedure for evaluating disability claims. 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520. This Circuit has implemented that procedure as follows: ... First, the [Commissioner] considers whether the claimant is currently engaged in substantial gainful activity. If he is not, the [Commissioner] next considers whether the claimant has a “severe impairment” which significantly limits his physical or mental ability to do basic work activities. If the claimant suffers such an impairment, the third inquiry is whether, based solely on medical evidence, the claimant has an impairment which is listed in Appendix 1 of the regulations. If the claimant has such an impairment, the [Commissioner] will consider him disabled without considering vocational factors such as age, education, and work experience_ Assuming the claimant does not have a listed impairment, the fourth inquiry is whether,' despite the claimant’s severe impairment, he has the residual functional capacity to perform his past work. Finally, if the claimant is unable to perform his past work, the [Commissioner] then determines whether there is other work which the claimant could perform. ... In this case, the ALJ undertook the prescribed five step analysis and found that Rosa had satisfied the first four steps.

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

Echevarria v. Apfel · filed 1999-05-11

The SSA has established a five-step sequence to be used in evaluating disability claims. 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1520, 416.920. ... At step four of the five-step regulatory analysis of 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1520 and 416.920, the SSA determines whether a claimant can return to his or her past job.

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

Chamberlain v. SSA · filed 1999-07-08

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

Section 404.1520(a) uses a five-step sequential evaluation process to determine whether a claimant is disabled.

Brady v. Apfel · filed 1999-03-16(a)

The Commissioner developed a five-step sequential evaluation analysis to aid claimants in determining when they are disabled.

Section 404.1520 uses a five-step disability evaluation in which “severe” is a threshold requiring the inquiry to continue beyond step two.

Sullivan v. SSA · filed 1999-06-21

The distinction, however, arises because the term "severe" is a term of art in the lexicon of Social Security law denoting a de minimus threshold for continued inguiry after Step Two of the five-step seguential evaluation process.

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

Craven v. Apfel · filed 1999-07-12

The Commissioner’s regulations set forth a five-step sequence to be used in evaluating disability claims.

Section 404.1520 requires the Commissioner to determine disability through a five-step sequential evaluation, ending with whether the claimant can perform other work.

Koenig v. Apfel · filed 1999-08-17

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

Section 404.1520 requires an ALJ to determine disability through a five-step sequential inquiry, including whether the claimant has a severe impairment and can perform other work.

Gauthier v. SSA · filed 1999-11-09

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

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

Hannaford v. SSA · filed 1999-12-03

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

Section 404.1520 requires the Commissioner to follow a five-step sequential disability evaluation and stop the review once disability or nondisability is found at any step.

Williams v. Apfel · filed 2000-02-11(a)

As noted above, this five-step analysis is sequential. Thus, if an individual is found to be disabled (or not) at any step, the Commissioner is not required to proceed to the next step. 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520(a) (“We follow a set order to determine whether you are disabled.... If we can find that you are disabled or not disabled at any point in the review, we do not review your claim further.”)

Section 404.1520 requires disability claims to be evaluated through a five-step sequence, ending with a burden on the Commissioner to show that the claimant can perform other available work.

Burnett v. Commissioner of Social Security Administration · filed 2000-07-25(a), (c), (d), (f)

In step one, the Commissioner must determine whether the claimant is currently engaging in substantial gainful activity. 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520(a). ... In step two, the Commissioner must determine whether the claimant is suffering from a severe impairment. 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520(c). ... In step three, the Commissioner compares the medical evidence of the claimant’s impairment to a list of impairments presumed severe enough to preclude any gainful work. 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520(d). ... Step four requires the ALJ to consider whether the claimant retains the residual functional capacity to perform her past relevant work. 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520(d). ... If the claimant is unable to resume her former occupation, the evaluation moves to the final step. At this stage, the burden of production shifts to the Commissioner, who must demonstrate the claimant is capable of performing other available work in order to deny a claim of disability. 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520(f).

Section 404.1520 requires an ALJ determining disability to use a five-step sequential analysis addressing substantial gainful activity, severe impairment, listed impairments, past relevant work, and other work.

Swanick v. SSA · filed 2000-07-25

When determining whether a claimant is disabled, the ALJ is required to conduct a five-step sequential analysis by making the following inquiries: (1) whether the claimant is engaged in substantial gainful activity; (2) whether the claimant has a severe impairment; (3) whether the impairment meets or equals a listed impairment; (4) whether the impairment prevents the claimant from performing past relevant work; and (5) whether the impairment prevents the claimant from doing any other work. 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1520 & 416.920.

Section 404.1520 requires a five-step sequential evaluation, including a second-step determination of whether the claimant's impairments are severe.

Allen v. Apfel · filed 2001-01-23

In applying the required five-step sequential process codified in 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520, the ALJ found at the second step, which involves an evaluation of the severity of the claimed impairments, that plaintiffs impairments were not “severe” and that plaintiff was therefore “not disabled.” ... “[A]n impairment can be considered not severe only if it is a slight abnormality that minimally affects work ability regardless of age, education, and experience.”

Section 404.1520 requires a five-step disability evaluation, with step five requiring consideration of whether a claimant unable to perform past work can perform other work in light of residual functional capacity and vocational factors.

Thompson v. Apfel · filed 2001-03-08(f)

A multi-step evaluation set forth in the Social Security Regulations (the “Regulations”) is utilized to determine whether a claimant is entitled to disability benefits. 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1520(a) (2000). If it is found at any step in the analysis that the claimant is not disabled, the claim is not reviewed further. 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1520(a) (2000). ... Upon a determination that the claimant cannot engage in his past relevant work, the ALJ must advance to the fifth and final step of the evaluation and analyze whether the claimant can perform other work. 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1520(f) (2000). In doing so, he is to consider residual functional capacity along with vocational factors including age, education, and past work experience. 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1520(f) (2000). ... Thus, it is the opinion of the undersigned that this matter be remanded to the ALJ for reconsideration of his conclusions as to step five of the sequential analysis, which may include the taking of the testimony of a vocational expert.

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

Kidd v. Commissioner of Social Security Administration · filed 2001-03-27

Since Kidd was an adult at the time of her 1991 application, 20 C .F.R. § 404.1520 dictates the following analysis: ... [ 1.] If you are working and the work you are doing is substantial gainful activity, we will find that you are not disabled regardless of your medical condition or your age, education, and work experience. ... [ 5.] If you cannot do any work you have done in the past because you have a severe impairment(s), we will consider your residual functional capacity and your age, education, and past work experience to see if you can do other work. If you cannot, we will find you disabled. ... 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520. The claimant has evidentiary burden to prove the first four steps. ... However, the burden shifts to the Commissioner to demonstrate that sufficient jobs exist in the national economy which the claimant could perform.

Section 404.1520 requires an ALJ to evaluate disability through five sequential steps, including determining whether the claimant can perform past relevant work.

Canfield v. SSA · filed 2001-04-19(e)

In applying the five-step sequential analysis, the ALJ is required to determine: (1) whether the claimant is presently engaged in substantial gainful activity; (2) whether the claimant has a severe impairment; (3) whether the impairment meets or equals a listed impairment; (4) whether the impairment prevents or prevented the claimant from performing past relevant work; and (5) whether the impairment prevents or prevented the claimant from doing any other work. See 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520 (2000).

Section 404.1520 requires a five-step disability evaluation, including a determination at step two whether each impairment is severe before proceeding to later steps.

Weber v. Massanari · filed 2001-06-06(c)

The Social Security Administration has adopted a system of sequential analysis for the evaluation of disability claims. This five-step evaluation is codified at 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520. ... Notwithstanding this objective medical evidence and the ALJ’s own concession that the results of the first test suggested a possible disability, the ALJ made no determination of the severity of the pulmonary impairment. Without the expected analysis, the court is left wondering whether the ALJ properly considered the impact of this impairment on his disability decision. Thex-efore, this court is constrained to remand this case to the Commissioner.

Section 404.1520 requires disability claims to be evaluated through a five-step sequence: substantial gainful activity, severe impairment, listed impairment, past work, and other work.

Mastro v. Kenneth S. Apfel, Commissioner of Social Security, No · filed 2001-07-05(b)-(f)

The five step analysis begins with the question of whether the claimant engaged in substantial gainful employment. 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520(b). 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). If the claimed impairment is sufficiently severe, the third step considers whether the claimant has an impairment that equals or exceeds in severity one or more of the impairments listed in Appendix I of the regulations. 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520(d); 20 C.F.R. Part 404, subpart P, App.I. If so the claim-ant is disabled. If not, the next inquiry considers if the impairment prevents the claimant from returning to past work. 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520(e); 20 C.F.R. § 404.1545(a). If the answer is in the affirmative, the final consideration looks to whether the impairment precludes the claimant from performing other work. 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520(f).

Section 404.1520 requires an ALJ to decide disability through five sequential steps, including whether the claimant can perform past relevant work and, if not, other work.

Poland v. SSA · filed 2001-08-02

The Act directs an ALJ to apply a five-step sequential analysis to determine whether a claimant is disabled.6 See 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520. At step four, the ALJ must determine whether the claimant's impairment prevents her from performing her past work. See id. § 404.1520(e). To make this determination, the ALJ must assess both the claimant's residual functional capacity ("RFC"), that is, what the claimant can do despite her impairments, and the demands of the claimant's prior employment.

Section 404.1520(a) requires an ALJ to evaluate disability claims through a five-step sequential inquiry until the claim can be decided.

Edlund v. Larry G. Massanari, Acting Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2001-08-09(a)

In evaluating whether a claimant suffers from a disability, an ALJ must apply a five-step sequential inquiry addressing both components of the definition, until a question is answered affirmatively or negatively in such a way that an ultimate determination can be made. 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1520(a)-(f), 416.920(a)-(f).

Section 404.1520 requires an ALJ to use a five-step sequential process to determine disability, including at step four deciding whether the claimant can perform past relevant work.

Sullivan v. SSA · filed 2001-12-07(e)

The Act directs an ALJ to apply a five-step sequential analysis to determine whether a claimant is disabled.4 See 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520. At step four, the ALJ must determine whether the claimant’s impairment prevents her from performing her past work. See id. § 404.1520(e).

Section 404.1520 establishes a sequential five-step disability inquiry that ends if the claimant is found not disabled at any step.

Schumacher v. Barnhart · filed 2002-04-16(a) (b)

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

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

Brewster v. SSA · filed 2002-08-02

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

Section 404.1520 requires a five-step sequential disability analysis, under which a claimant is not disabled at step five if other work exists that accommodates the claimant’s residual functional capacity and vocational factors.

Young v. Apfel · filed 2002-07-08

In making a determination as to disability under this definition, an ALJ is required to follow the five-step sequential analysis set out in 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520, which provides: ... 5. Even if claimant’s impairment does prevent him from doing his past relevant work, if other work exists in the national economy that accommodates his residual functional capacity and vocational factors (age, education, skills, etc.), he is not disabled.

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

KULAKOSKI v. Barnhart · filed 2002-07-20

The Commissioner has promulgated a five-step analysis for evaluating disability claims. ... In this case, the ALJ adhered to the regulatory five-step sequential evaluation.

Section 404.1520 establishes a five-step sequential evaluation for disability claims, placing the burden on the claimant through step four and shifting the burden of production to the Commissioner at step five.

Delgado v. Comm Social Security · filed 2002-10-31(a)-(f)

In such a claim for Disability Insurance Benefits, the Commissioner considers the following five-step sequential evaluation: (1) whether the claimant is engaging in work activity, (2) whether the claimant has a severe impairment, (3) whether the claimant’s impairment meets or equals the requirements of a listed impairment, (4) whether the claimant has the ability to return to his past work, and (5) if not, whether the claimant can perform any other work. See 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520 (a)-(f). The claimant bears the burden of proof as to steps one through four; if he is able to make the requisite showing that he is unable to perform his previous work, then “the burden of production shifts to the Commissioner, who must demonstrate the claimant is capable of performing other available work in order to deny a claim of disability.” Plummer, 186 F.3d at 428 (citing § 404.1520(f)). We find that the Commissioner’s denial of Delgado’s claim was supported by substantial evidence.

At step three, the regulation requires determining whether the claimant’s impairments meet or equal a listed impairment, and at step four, it requires specific findings about residual functional capacity and past relevant work.

Worley v. Barnhart · filed 2002-12-13(d), (e)

On remand, and considering whether Worley meets the requirements of step three, the ALJ must credit Dr. Taus’s report and determine whether Worley’s impairments met or equaled a listed impairment precluding substantial gainful activity. 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520(d); 20 C.F.R. Pt. 404 Subpt. P.App. 1, § 12.04. ... With regard to step four, the ALJ failed to make specific findings as to Worley’s residual functional capacity, the physical and mental demands of her past relevant work, and the relationship between the past relevant work and her residual functional capacity. 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1520(e) and 416.920(e); ... On remand, the ALJ shall do so, giving credit to Dr. Taus’s report. Then, if necessary, the ALJ shall proceed to step five.

Section 404.1520 requires disability claims to be evaluated through a five-step sequential process, including consideration of the claimant’s residual functional capacity and other work available in the national economy.

Sheline v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2002-12-19

Step one is whether the claimant is currently engaged in substantial gainful activity. If claimant is not, the fact finder in step two decides whether the claimant has a medically severe impairment or combination of impairments. Step three entails looking at whether the impairment is equivalent to one of a number of listed impairments that the Commissioner acknowledges are so severe as to preclude substantial gainful activity. If no equivalency, step four requires the claimant to show that because of the impairment he is unable to perform his past work. The final step is to determine whether the claimant has the residual functional capacity (“RFC”) to perform other work available in the national economy, considering such additional factors as age, education, and past work experience.

Section 404.1520 requires disability claims to be evaluated through a five-step sequential process, including whether the claimant can perform other work at step five.

Johnson v. SSA · filed 2003-01-21

The five-step sequential analysis requires the ALJ to determine: (1) whether the claimant is presently engaged in substantial gainful activity; (2) whether the claimant has a severe impairment; (3) whether the impairment meets or equals a listed impairment; (4) whether the impairment prevents the claimant from performing past relevant work; and (5) whether the impairment prevents the claimant from doing any other work. See 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520 (2002).

Section 404.1520 establishes a five-step sequential inquiry for determining whether a claimant is disabled: substantial gainful activity, severe impairment, listed impairment, ability to perform past relevant work, and ability to perform other work.

Drejka v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2003-01-28

The ALJ applied the five-step inquiry, as required by the Social Security Act, to determine whether Drejka was disabled. The elements are (1) whether the claimant is engaged in substantial gainful activity; (2) whether claimant has a severe impairment; (3) whether claimant’s impairment meets or equals a listed impairment; (4) whether the claimant’s impairment prevents the claimant from doing past relevant work; and (5) whether claimant’s impairment prevents the claimant from doing any other work. 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1520 and 416.920 (2002).

At step three, the Commissioner must determine whether the claimant’s impairment meets or equals one of the listed impairments.

Shontos v. Barnhart · filed 2003-03-07

At step three, the Commissioner must determine whether the claimant’s impairment meets or equals one of the listed impairments.

Section 404.1520(b) makes substantial gainful activity the first step in the ALJ's five-step disability determination.

Doherty v. Barnhart · filed 2003-03-03(b)

A five-step sequential process is utilized by the ALJ to determine whether a claimant qualifies for disability benefits. ... 1) whether the claimant is currently engaged in substantial gainful activity, as an individual who is working and engaging in substantial gainful activity will not be found disabled, regardless of the medical findings; ... 5) if an individual’s impairment precludes them from performing their past work, other factors, including age, education, past work experience and residual functional capacity must be considered to determine if there is any work in the national economy that the individual can perform.

Section 404.1520 requires an ALJ to evaluate disability claims through a five-step sequential process, including considering substantial gainful activity, severe impairment, listed impairments, past relevant work, and other work.

Mejia v. Barnhart · filed 2003-04-16

In evaluating an application for disability insurance, an ALJ must follow the five-step procedure for finding disability set forth in the agency regulations implementing the Social Security Act. ... First, the ALJ must determine whether the claimant is presently engaged in substantial gainful activity. If not, the ALJ must determine whether the claimant has a “severe impairment” that significantly limits his or her ability to engage in basic work activities. If the claimant does suffer from such an impairment, the ALJ must determine whether this impairment “meets or equals a listed impairment” as contained in Appendix 1 of the regulations. If this third criteria is satisfied, the claimant is presumed to be disabled. If, however, the third criteria is not met, a presumption of disability does not arise, and the ALJ must determine whether or not the claimant is able to perform his or her past relevant work. If this fourth criteria is satisfied, the fifth step requires the ALJ to determine whether the claimant is capable of performing any other work.

Section 404.1520 requires an administrative law judge evaluating a disability-insurance application to use the regulations' five-step procedure for determining disability.

Johnson v. Barnhart · filed 2003-06-26

In evaluating an application for disability insurance, an ALJ must follow the five-step procedure for finding disability set forth in the agency regulations implementing the Social Security Act.

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

Torres v. Thompson · filed 2003-07-31

The ALJ properly applied the five-step analysis to determine eligibility for disability benefits under 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520.

Section 404.1520(b) places disability claims within the regulation’s five-step sequential evaluation, beginning with whether the claimant is engaged in substantial gainful activity.

Santiago v. Barnhart · filed 2003-08-13(b)

In determining whether a claimant is disabled and entitled to benefits, the ALJ conducts a five-step sequential inquiry. 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520 (2003); 20 C.F.R. § 416.920. At the first step, the ALJ considers whether the claimant is engaged in substantial gainful activity. If the claimant is not engaged in substantial gainful activity, the second step involves a determination of whether the claimant has a severe impairment (i.e., an impairment that has a significant effect on the claimant’s ability to function). If the claimant has a severe impairment, the third step requires the ALJ to determine whether the claimant has a condition which meets or equals the conditions outlined in the Listings of Impairments in Appendix One of the Regulations. 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, and the ALJ need not make any specific finding as to his ability to perform past relevant work or any other jobs. If the claimant does not have such a condition, the fourth step involves a determination of whether the claimant is capable of performing his past relevant work. Finally, if the claimant is not capable of performing his past relevant work, the ALJ must determine whether the claimant is capable of performing other work which exists in substantial numbers in the national economy. 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1520(b)-(f); §§ 416.920(b)-(f).

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

Pritchett v. Barnhart · filed 2003-09-09(a)

In determining whether a claimant is disabled, Social Security regulations outline a five-step sequential process.

Section 404.1520 establishes a five-step sequential evaluation for disability claims, ending the inquiry when the claimant is found not disabled at any step and requiring consideration of the claimant’s work, impairment severity, listed impairments, past relevant work, and ability to do other work.

Carroll v. Barnhart · filed 2003-11-17

The Commissioner uses a five-step sequential process in order to determine if an individual is disabled. 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520. The sequential evaluation ends if the ALJ, at any step of the process, finds the claimant is not disabled. § 404.1520(a)(4). The ALJ must inquire: 1) whether the claimant is working and whether the work is a substantial gainful activity; 2) whether the claimant’s impairment is severe; 3) whether the impairments meet or equal a listed impairment in 20 C.F.R. pt. 404, subpt. P, app. 1; 4) whether the claimant is able to perform her past relevant work; and 5) whether the claimant’s age, education, and past relevant work experience in reference to her RFC, enables her to do other work. § 404.1520(a)(4)(i)-(v).

Section 404.1520 requires an ALJ evaluating whether a claimant is disabled because of a physical or mental impairment to use a five-step sequential evaluation process.

Russell v. SSA · filed 2004-01-09

When evaluating whether a claimant is disabled due to a physical or mental impairment, an ALJ’s analysis is governed by a five-step sequential evaluation process.

Section 404.1520 requires a five-step sequential evaluation of disability claims, and the ALJ properly followed those evaluation steps.

Bauter v. Barnhart · filed 2004-03-29

On appeal, Bauter first argues that the ALJ improperly conducted the five-step sequential evaluation. We disagree and find the ALJ engaged in the proper evaluation steps. See 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520 (2003).

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

DeCarlo v. Barnhart · filed 2004-12-02(a)

The ALJ utilizes a five-step analysis to evaluate eligibility for disability benefits. 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520(a). The ALJ must determine: (1) whether the claimant is currently engaged in a “substantial gainful activity;” (2) if not, whether the claimant suffers from a “severe impairment;” (3) if the claimant has a severe impairment, whether the impairment falls on the list of impairments presumed to be severe enough to preclude gainful work, as listed in 20 C.F.R., pt. 404, subpt. P., appx. 1; (4) whether the claimant’s impairments prevent the claimant from performing her past relevant work; (5) if the claimant is incapable of resuming her former occupation, whether the claimant is capable of performing other jobs existing in significant numbers in the national economy, in light of her age, education, work experience, and residual functional capacity. 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520.

Section 404.1520(a) requires disability claims to be evaluated through the Commissioner's five-step sequential process, and a claim should proceed beyond step two when the claimant presents more than a slight abnormality that has more than a minimal effect on the ability to work.

Jakubowski v. Commissioner Social Security · filed 2005-04-12(a)

In determining whether an applicant is disabled within the meaning of the Act, and therefore eligible for benefits, the Commissioner applies the familiar five-step sequential evaluation process. The Commissioner inquires, in turn, whether an applicant: (1) is engaged in substantial gainful activity; (2) suffers from an impairment or combination of impairments that is “severe”; (3) suffers from an impairment or combination of impairments that meets or equals a listed impairment; (4) is able to perform his or her past relevant work; and (5) is able to perform work existing in significant numbers in the national economy. See 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1520(a)-(f), 416.920(a)-(f). ... The Commissioner may deny an applicant’s claim for failure to establish the existence of a “severe impairment” at step two of the sequential framework. But step two should rarely be the stage at which an applicant’s claim is rejected. ... We find the evidence of “severe impairment” set forth in Dr. Carran’s report sufficient to satisfy step two, and conclude that the ALJ erred in concluding otherwise.

Section 404.1520 requires disability claims to be evaluated through a five-step sequence: at step four, the claimant's residual functional capacity is compared with past relevant work, and at step five, the Commissioner must show that the claimant can perform other work existing in significant numbers in the national economy.

Henry v. Comm Social Security · filed 2005-04-14(g), (e)

At step five the Commissioner has the burden to show that the claimant can perform other work that exists in substantial numbers in the national economy, and if that burden is met the claimant will be found not disabled. See 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1520(g); Plummer, 186 F.3d at 427-28. ... In step four, the Commissioner examines the claimant’s “residual functional capacity” and whether that capacity enables her to perform her past relevant work. 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520(e). If so, the claimant is not eligible for disability benefits.

Section 404.1520 establishes a five-step sequential process for deciding disability, with the claimant bearing the burden through past relevant work and the Commissioner bearing the burden at the final step to show other available work.

Street v. Jo Anne B. Barnhart · filed 2005-05-18

The Social Security Regulations outline a five-step sequential evaluation process for determining whether a claimant is disabled. 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520; Jones, 190 F.3d at 1228. First, the claimant must show that he has not engaged in a substantial gainful activity. Jones, 190 F.3d at 1228. Second, he must prove he has a severe impairment or combination of impairments. Id. In step three, if his impairment meets or equals a listed impairment, he is automatically found disabled. Id. If it does not, as in the present case, he must prove that he is unable to perform his past relevant work. Id. Finally, if the claimant cannot perform past relevant work, then the burden shifts to the Commissioner in the fifth step to show that there is other work available in significant numbers in the national economy that the claimant is able to perform.

Section 404.1520 sets out the five-step sequential analysis for reviewing a disability claim, and briefly reviewing undisputed steps does not invalidate the decision.

Baranich v. Barnhart · filed 2005-04-19

The ALJ followed the appropriate legal analysis set forth in 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520 in reviewing Baranich’s claim. That the ALJ also briefly reviewed certain undisputed steps of that legal analysis does not render the ALJ’s decision-making process infirm.

Section 404.1520 establishes a five-step sequential process for deciding disability claims: substantial gainful activity, severe impairment, listed impairment, past relevant work, and other work in the national economy, with the burden shifting to the Commissioner at step five.

Street v. Jo Anne B. Barnhart · filed 2005-05-18

The Social Security Regulations outline a five-step sequential evaluation process for determining whether a claimant is disabled. 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520; Jones, 190 F.3d at 1228. First, the claimant must show that he has not engaged in a substantial gainful activity. Jones, 190 F.3d at 1228. Second, he must prove he has a severe impairment or combination of impairments. Id. In step three, if his impairment meets or equals a listed impairment, he is automatically found disabled. Id. If it does not, as in the present case, he must prove that he is unable to perform his past relevant work. Id. Finally, if the claimant cannot perform past relevant work, then the burden shifts to the Commissioner in the fifth step to show that there is other work available in significant numbers in the national economy that the claimant is able to perform.

Section 404.1520 requires disability to be evaluated through five ordered steps, with the evaluation stopping when the claimant is conclusively found disabled or not disabled; drug- or alcohol-addiction materiality is considered only after a finding of disability under that five-step inquiry.

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

This process requires the Commissioner to consider, in order, whether a claimant 1) is working; 2) has a severe impairment; 3) has an impairment that meets or equals the requirements of a listed impairment; 4) can return to his past relevant work; and 5) if not, whether he can perform other work. ... If the Commissioner finds conclusively' that a claimant is or is not disabled at any point in this process, review does not proceed to the next step. ... Thus, under the Commissioner’s regulations, an ALJ must first conduct the five-step disability inquiry without considering the impact of alcoholism or drug addiction. ... In other words, if, and only if, an ALJ finds a claimant disabled under the five-step disability inquiry, should the ALJ evaluate whether the claimant would still be disabled if he or she stopped using drugs or alcohol.

Section 404.1520 requires disability determinations to proceed through five sequential questions, with the answers directing progression through the analysis and determining disability as specified.

Wrenn v. SSA · filed 2005-06-27

When evaluating whether a claimant is disabled due to a physical or mental impairment, an ALJ's analysis is governed by a five-step seguential evaluation process. See 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520. An ALJ is reguired to consider the following issues when determining if a claimant is disabled: (1) whether the claimant is engaged in substantial gainful activity; (2) whether the claimant has a severe impairment; (3) whether the impairment meets or equals a listed impairment; (4) whether the impairment prevents or prevented the claimant from performing past relevant work; and (5) whether the impairment prevents or prevented the claimant from doing any other work. 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520. An affirmative answer at one step leads to the next step in the analysis. Id. If the answer to question (3) or (5) is affirmative, the claimant is disabled. Id. If the answer to any question other than (3) is negative, the claimant is not disabled. Id.

Section 404.1520 requires disability claims to be evaluated through a five-step sequence: substantial gainful activity, severity, listed impairment, past work, and other work, with a negative answer except at step three ending the inquiry.

Ford v. SSA · filed 2005-07-07

When evaluating whether a claimant is disabled due to a physical or mental impairment, an ALJ's analysis is governed by a five-step seguential evaluation process. 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520. The ALJ is reguired to consider the following issues when determining if a claimant is disabled: (1) whether the claimant is engaged in substantial gainful activity; (2) whether the claimant has a severe impairment; (3) whether the impairment meets or eguals a listed impairment; (4) whether the impairment prevents or prevented the claimant from performing past relevant work, and (5) whether the impairment prevents or prevented the claimant from doing any other work. 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520. An affirmative answer at one step leads to the next step in the analysis. Id. If the answer to any guestion other than (3) is negative, the claimant is not disabled. Id.

Section 404.1520 requires an ALJ to use a five-step sequential evaluation framework when assessing a disability claim.

Bruso v. SSA · filed 2005-06-29(a)(4)

In assessing a claim of disability, an ALJ must implement the "five-step seguential evaluation" as a framework for his analysis.

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

Davis v. Barnhart · filed 2005-07-25(a)

In determining whether a claimant is disabled, Social Security regulations outline a five-step sequential process. 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520(a)-(f). The Commissioner must determine in sequence: ... (5) whether the claimant is capable of performing any work in the national economy. ... The vocational expert testimony upon which the ALJ relied to find the plaintiff not disabled was based upon an RFC finding that was not supported by substantial evidence. Therefore, the Commissioner failed to carry her burden at step five of showing the plaintiff could perform other work. Accordingly, the plaintiff is disabled within the meaning of the Social Security Act.

Section 404.1520 requires disability determinations to follow a five-step sequential evaluation, including consideration of past relevant work and, if necessary, other work in the national economy.

Acosta v. Comm Social Security · filed 2005-08-09

A claimant’s disability determination must be reached by using the “five-step sequential evaluation process” delineated in 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520. The five step inquiry examines whether the claimant is currently engaged in substantial, gainful activity; if not, whether the impairment is contained or equivalent to one in the list of impairments set out in 20 C.F.R. § 404, subpt. P, app. 1. If the claimant’s disability is on the list or is equivalent to a disability on the list, s/he will be found disabled. 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520. If the claimant’s disability does not meet or equal one on the list, the Commissioner must consider whether the claimant could return to her past relevant work. If s/he cannot, the Commissioner must assess whether based on the claimant’s age, education, and work experience, and residual functional capacity,1 s/he can engage in other work available in the national economy. Id.

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

Clay v. Barnhart · filed 2005-08-09(a)

In evaluating claims for disability, we conduct a five step sequential evaluation: (1) is the claimant engaging in substantial gainful activity; (2) does the claimant have severe impairment(s); (3) does the impairment or combination of impairments meet or equal an impairment listed in the Listing of Impairments in Appendix 1, Subpart P, 20 C.F.R. Part 404; (4) does the impairment or combination of impairments prevent the claimant from doing past relevant work; and (5) does the impairment or combination of impairments prevent the claimant from performing any other work which exists in significant numbers in the national economy. 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520(a)-(g).

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

Payne v. Barnhart · filed 2005-08-25(b)-(f)

Claims for Social Security disability insurance benefits are evaluated using a five-step process. A claimant may be found to have no disability at any one of the sequential steps. The claimant must prove (1) that he is not presently engaged in substantial gainful work, (2) that he has a severe “impairment,” and either (3) that he suffers for more than twelve months from one or more listed impairments, ... or (4) that he is incapable of performing past relevant work. ... If the claimant prevails on the first four steps, the fifth step shifts the burden to the Commissioner to make a finding of no disability only if the commissioner proves that the claimant, based upon his age, education, work experience and residual functional capacity, is capable of performing other gainful work. 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1520(f), 416.920(f).

Section 404.1520 requires the Commissioner to use a five-step sequential evaluation and permits a disability determination at any one of the five steps.

Rease v. Barnhart · filed 2006-04-12

As noted above, the Commissioner’s regulations require the ALJ to utilize a five-step sequential evaluation, which regulations also permit such a determination to be made at any one of the five sequential steps. 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520.

Section 404.1520 requires the ALJ to evaluate disability through five sequential questions, including whether the claimant can perform past or other work.

Bailey v. Barnhart · filed 2006-06-12

Under this rule, the ALJ must consider: (1) whether the claimant is presently unemployed; (2) whether the claimant has a severe impairment or combination of impairments; (3) whether the claimant’s impairment meets or equals any impairment listed in the regulations as being so severe as to preclude substantial gainful activity; (4) whether the claimant is unable to perform his past relevant work; and (5) whether the claimant is unable to perform any other work existing in significant numbers in the national economy.

At the fifth step of the sequential evaluation, once the claimant has met the burden of showing inability to perform past relevant work, the Commissioner must show that the claimant can perform other available work or disability must be found.

Landeta v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2006-08-14(f)

If the claimant meets her burden, the burden then shifts to the Commissioner for the fifth and final step. In this fifth step, the Commissioner must demonstrate that the claimant is able to perform other available work; otherwise the claim of disability must be granted. Id. (citing 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520(f)).

Section 404.1520 requires disability to be determined through a five-step process, including evaluation of whether the claimant has a severe impairment and whether the impairment meets a conclusive disability criterion.

Wright v. Barnhart · filed 2007-02-06(b)

The Commissioner must find a claimant disabled under the Social Security Act if she determines “(1) that the claimant is not working, (2) that [s]he has a ‘severe impairment,’ (3) that the impairment is not one that conclusively requires a determination of disability, and (4) that the claimant is not capable of continuing in [her] prior type of work, [and] (5) there is not another type of work the claimant can do.”

Section 404.1520(a)(4)(SSD) sets out the five-step sequential evaluation used to determine disability, including whether the claimant can adjust to other work at step five.

Williams v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2007-04-24(a)(4)(SSD)

A determination of disability is based on a five-step analysis set out in the regulations. Step one asks if the claimant is currently engaged in “substantial gainful activity.” Step two asks if the claimant’s impairment is “severe.” Step three asks if the impairment appears in the “Listing of Impairments,” 20 C.F.R. Part 404, Subpart P, App. 1. Step four asks if the claimant can still do “past relevant work.” Step five asks if the claimant “can make an adjustment to other work,” with reference to the “Medical Vocational Guidelines” (“the Grids”), 20 C.F.R. Part 404, Subpart P, App. 2, Tables 1-3. See 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520(a)(4)(SSD); 20 C.F.R. § 416.920(a)(4)(SSI).

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

Chrisman v. Astrue · filed 2007-05-09(a)

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

Section 404.1520(a)(4) requires disability claims to be evaluated through a five-step sequential analysis.

Mikol v. Barnhart · filed 2007-05-25(a)(4)

Regulations of the Commissioner set forth a five-step analysis that must be used in evaluating a disability claim.

Section 404.1520 requires a five-step disability evaluation: negative findings at steps one, two, four, or five end the inquiry, while step three tests whether a severe impairment meets or medically equals a listed impairment and step four tests the ability to perform past relevant work.

Cruz v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2007-08-01(a)(4)(i)-(v)

In order to determine if an applicant is entitled to Social Security disability benefits, the ALJ applies a five-step sequential evaluation process. 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520(a)(4)(i)-(v). A negative conclusion at steps one, two, four or five precludes a finding of disability. “An affirmative answer at steps one, two or four leads to the next step. An affirmative answer at steps three or five results in a finding of disability.” Id., Young v. Secretary of Health and Human Services, 957 F.2d 386, 389 (7th Cir. 1992) (citations omitted).

Section 404.1520’s sequential evaluation treats severity as a distinct step, and a finding that an impairment is severe does not by itself establish disability.

Cohen v. Astrue · filed 2007-10-05

Of course, a finding of “ ‘[severity’ is not equivalent to a finding of ‘disability’ under the ... Act.” 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1520, 416.920 (2007).

Section 404.1520 requires a five-step sequential evaluation of disability, including an RFC assessment after the first three steps that is used at steps four and five.

Coleman v. Astrue · filed 2007-11-13

In the first three steps, the Commissioner determines whether claimant has engaged in substantial gainful activity since the alleged onset, whether he has severe impairments, and whether the severity of his impairments meets or equals the Listing of Impairments (20 C.F.R., Pt. 404, Subpt. P, App. 1). ... If claimant’s impairments do not meet or equal the severity of a listed impairment, the Commissioner assesses claimant’s RFC. 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520. This assessment is used at both step four and step five of the process.

Section 404.1520 requires a five-step inquiry for determining whether a claimant is disabled, and the court held that the ALJ correctly executed that inquiry.

Martinez v. Astrue · filed 2007-10-24

In finding that Martinez was not disabled, the ALJ correctly executed the five-step inquiry required by 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520.

Section 404.1520 requires disability claims to be evaluated through five steps, with step four asking whether the claimant’s residual functional capacity permits performance of past work.

Flynn v. Astrue · filed 2008-01-17

The ALJ conducts the five-step evaluation as listed in 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520. ... At the fourth step, the ALJ determines “whether the claimant’s RFC is sufficient for her to perform her past work.”

Section 404.1520 requires a five-step inquiry for determining whether a claimant is disabled.

Martinez v. Astrue · filed 2007-10-24

In finding that Martinez was not disabled, the ALJ correctly executed the five-step inquiry required by 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520.

Section 404.1520 requires the Commissioner to use a five-step sequential process to determine disability and stop reviewing the claim once disability or non-disability is established.

Boulanger v. Astrue · filed 2007-10-30(a)(4)

To determine disability, the Commissioner uses a five-step sequential analysis. ... If a finding of disability or non-disability can be made at any point in the sequential process, the Commissioner will not review the claim further.

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

Bronson v. Astrue · filed 2008-01-08

The Commissioner has established a five-step sequential process to evaluate whether a claimant is disabled.

Section 404.1520 requires a five-step disability evaluation and treats an impairment as severe at step two only when it significantly limits the claimant’s ability to perform basic work activities.

Hibbard v. Astrue · filed 2008-02-04(a)(4) (c)

To determine whether a social security claimant is legally disabled, the ALJ must perform a five-step evaluation. ... Second, if the claimant is not performing substantial gainful work, her impairment(s) must be considered “severe” before can be considered disabled. ... A severe impairment is an impairment which significantly limits a claimant’s physical or mental abilities to perform basic work activities.

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

Kenefick v. Astrue · filed 2008-02-13(a)

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

Section 404.1520 requires an ALJ deciding disability to use a five-step sequential analysis.

Anthony v. Comm Social Security · filed 2008-02-22

In making a determination as to disability under the above definition, an ALJ is required to follow a five-step sequential analysis set out in the SSA’s regulations. See 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520.

Section 404.1520 requires disability claims to be evaluated through five steps, and failing to identify the specific severe impairments at step two is harmless when the record shows that all alleged impairments were evaluated and permits review of the ALJ’s reasoning.

Perry v. Astrue · filed 2008-06-04

The ALJ explicitly stated that he was following the five-step sequential evaluation process required by 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520. See R.Exh. at 18. Although the ALJ did not identify which impairments he considered severe at step two, he explicitly stated, when determining Perry’s RFC in step four, that he was considering “all symptoms, including pain” and that Perry alleged “an enlarged heart, high blood pressure, chest pain, and degenerative disc disease.” Id. at 19, 23. ... Because the ALJ found that Perry was not disabled after enumerating and evaluating all of the impairments and symptoms alleged and explaining his reasoning based on the record and the law, any error the ALJ may have made by not specifically identifying at step two which impairments he found to be severe did not deprive us of the ability to evaluate the ALJ’s legal reasoning based upon the record.

Section 404.1520 requires disability claims to proceed through a five-step sequential evaluation, with step two asking whether the alleged impairment is severe before the claim advances.

Germany-Johnson v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2008-11-05(a)(4)

Under applicable Social Security regulations, the merit of a disability claim is determined by following a sequential five-step analysis. See 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520. The ALJ must determine, first, whether the claimant is working; second, whether the alleged impairment is severe; third, whether the impairment meets or equals a listed impairment and hence has a certain level of severity; fourth, whether the claimant can still do past relevant work; and, finally, when considering the claimant’s age, education, work experience, and residual functional capacity, whether the claimant can do other work. See 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520(a)(4).

At Step Two, § 404.1520(c) requires assessing whether an impairment or combination of impairments significantly limits a claimant's ability to perform basic work activities.

Ridinger v. Astrue · filed 2008-11-24(c)

At Step Two, the ALJ is required to assess the claimant’s impairments to determine whether “any impairment or combination of impairments ... significantly limits [his] physical or mental ability to do basic work activities.” 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520(c); SSR 96-3p.

Section 404.1520(a) permits the sequential disability evaluation to end at step two only when an impairment is a slight abnormality with no more than a minimal effect on the claimant’s ability to work.

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

The sequential evaluation process can only be terminated at the step two level when the claimant’s impairment or combination of impairments is found to be “not severe” that is, a slight abnormality that would have no more than a minimal impact on the claimant’s ability to work.

When a claimant cannot perform past relevant work, the Commissioner must proceed to step five and show that other work exists that the claimant can perform.

Dixon v. Astrue · filed 2009-02-13

If a claimant cannot return to her past relevant work, the Commissioner must, at step 5 of the evaluative process, show that there is work that the claimant can perform.

Section 404.1520(a)(4) requires disability claims to proceed through five sequential steps, with past relevant work considered at step four and other available work at step five.

Snyder v. Commr. of Social Security · filed 2009-05-29(a)(4)

The answer to this question depends upon the stage in the five-step sequential evaluation process and the state of the record. An ALJ evaluates a disability benefits claim using a five-step sequential evaluation of: (1) whether the claimant engaged in substantial gainful activity; (2) whether the claimant has a severe impairment; (3) whether the severe impairment meets or equals an impairment in the Listing of Impairments; (4) whether the claimant has the residual functional capacity to perform his or her past relevant work; and (5) whether, in light of the claimant’s residual functional capacity, age, education and work experience, there are other jobs the claimant can perform. See 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1520(a)(4), 416.920(a)(4); see also Phillips, 357 F.3d at 1237. ... Here, the ALJ committed multiple errors in making his residual functional capacity finding, which informs both steps four and five of the evaluation. Because the ALJ previously concluded that Snyder had the residual functional capacity to perform her past relevant work as a telemarketer, the ALJ stopped at the fourth step of the evaluation and did not address the fifth step. Thus, on remand the ALJ must not only reconsider step four, but also complete the sequential evaluation in step five based on the current record.

Section 404.1520 requires the Commissioner to determine at step two whether the claimant has a severe impairment and at step three whether the impairment meets or medically equals a listed impairment.

Dougherty v. Astrue · filed 2010-05-07(c), (d)

As explained above, step two of an ALJ’s evaluation process requires a determination of whether the medical evidence indicates that the claimant suffers from a severe impairment. Step three requires evaluation of whether a claimant’s impairment meets or medically equals the criteria listed in 20 C.F.R. Part 404, Subpart P, Appendix 1. For the reasons below, the court finds (1) that the ALJ did in fact recognize the severity of Dougherty’s infections and (2) that the ALJ did not err in failing to find that Dougherty’s impairments met Listing 1.08. ... Accordingly, the court finds no error in the ALJ’s failure to discuss whether Dougherty’s impairments met or medically equaled Listing 1.08.

Section 404.1520(a)(4)(iii) places the severity determination at step three of the sequential evaluation process, where the claimant's impairment is assessed against the listings.

Myers v. Colvin · filed 2013-07-18(a)(4)(iii)

The severity determination occurs at step three of the sequential evaluation process. 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1520(a)(4)(iii), 416.920(a)(4)(iii).

Section 404.1520 uses a sequential evaluation in which step-three findings are distinct from the residual functional capacity assessment made at a later step.

Kamerling v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2019-09-26

The magistrate judge fully and properly explained why the ALJ’s mental RFC was not required to parrot the ALJ’s CPP findings at step three of the sequential analysis: “step three findings are not the same as the RFC determination.” ... As substantial evidence otherwise supported the ALJ’s mental RFC, there was no error.

Section 404.1520 requires disability claims to be evaluated through a five-step sequence; at step three, disability is established only when an impairment meets or medically equals all criteria of a listed impairment.

Patterson v. Saul (CONSENT) · filed 2020-01-22(a)(4)(iii), (d)

A plaintiff is disabled if her impairment meets or equals a Listing. 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1520(a)(4)(iii) and (d), 416.920(a)(4)(iii) and (d).7 A claimant’s impairment must meet or equal all of the specified medical criteria in a particular Listing for the claimant to be found disabled at step three of the sequential evaluation.

At step three, the ALJ must determine whether the claimant’s impairment meets or medically equals a listed impairment, and if it does, the claimant is disabled subject to the durational requirement.

Nashir v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2020-03-25(d)

At step three of the disability analysis, the ALJ examines whether a claimant’s impairment meets or medically equals the criteria of a Listings impairment. 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520(d). If the impairment meets or medically equals the criteria of a listing and meets the durational requirement (20 C.F.R. § 404.1509), the claimant is disabled. If not, the ALJ determines the claimant’s RFC and proceeds to the next step of the sequential disability analysis. 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520 (e)-(f).

Section 404.1520(a)(4)(iii) requires the ALJ at step three to determine whether the claimant’s impairment meets or equals a listed impairment.

Coumont v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2020-08-25(a)(4)(iii)

At step three of the sequential evaluation process, the ALJ considers whether one or more of the claimant’s impairments meets or equals an impairment listed in Appendix 1 to Subpart P of the regulations. 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520(a)(4)(iii). Each Listing sets forth the “symptoms, signs, and laboratory findings” which must be established for a claimant’s impairment to meet the Listing. Tackett v. Apfel, 180 F.3d 1094, 1099 (9th Cir. 1999).

Section 404.1520(d) requires the adjudicator at step three to determine whether a severe impairment meets or equals a listed impairment; meeting or equaling a listing establishes per se disability, while otherwise the evaluation proceeds to step four.

Read v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2020-09-04(d)

Step three involves a determination of whether one of the claimant’s severe impairments “meets or equals” one of the listed impairments acknowledged by the Commissioner to be sufficiently severe as to preclude substantial gainful activity. 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1520(d), 404.1525, 404.1526 & 416.920(d), 416.925, 416.926; 20 C.F.R. § 404 Subpt. P. App. 1 (“the Listings”). If the impairment meets or equals one of the listed impairments, the claimant is per se disabled and qualifies for benefits. Id. If the claimant is not per se disabled, the evaluation proceeds to the fourth step. ... Because Plaintiff did not have an “extreme” limitation in any one category or “marked” limitations in two categories, the ALJ concluded that Plaintiff did not satisfy the Paragraph “B” criteria and therefore her depressive disorder did not meet or equal Listing 12.04.

Section 404.1520(a) requires the Commissioner, at step three of the disability evaluation, to determine whether the claimant’s impairments meet or medically equal the relevant listed impairments; meeting only some listing requirements is insufficient.

Banks v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2021-03-15(a)

At step three of the disability evaluation process, the Commissioner must consider whether a claimant’s impairments meet or medically equal any of the relevant listing requirements of 20 C.F.R. Part 404, Subpart P, App. 1, 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520(a). An impairment that meets only some of the requirements of a listing does not qualify, despite its severity.

Section 404.1520(a)(4) establishes a sequential evaluation in which a claimant may establish disability at step three by showing that her impairments meet or equal a listed impairment.

Snaith v. Social Security Administration, Commissioner · filed 2021-03-15(a)(4)(iii)

At Step Three of the sequential evaluation process, a claimant may establish disability if she proves her impairments meet or equal an impairment listed in the Listing of Impairments. See 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1520(a)(4)(iii), 416.920(a)(4)(iii); Doughty v. Apfel, 245 F.3d 1274, 1278 (11th Cir. 2001).

Section 404.1520 treats the step-three listing-severity determination as distinct from the later residual functional capacity assessment.

Winship v. Saul · filed 2021-03-19

Plaintiff further states that the ALJ’s assessed moderate limitations with interacting with others and concentration, persistence, or pace were not properly accounted for by limitations against public interaction and to simple, repetitive, routine tasks. The ALJ, however, determined the moderate limitations at step three of his analysis addressing listing-level severity (Tr. 15). The step three finding is not an RFC assessment. See 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1520, 404.1520a, 416.920, and 416.920a.

At step three, the ALJ must decide whether the claimant’s impairments meet or equal a listed impairment and explain the analysis sufficiently for meaningful judicial review.

Henderson v. Saul · filed 2021-05-07(a)(4)(iii)

At step three, the ALJ must determine whether a claimant’s impairments meet or equal a listed impairment. ... The ALJ’s decision here suffers from the same flaw. The ALJ simply concluded that Plaintiff’s physical impairments did not meet or equal a listed impairment. However, he did not specifically identify which sub-listings he analyzed or provide any rationale supporting his decision that would allow for meaningful review. ... This stands in stark contrast to the ALJ’s consideration of Plaintiff’s physical limitations and demonstrates the ALJ’s analysis of Plaintiff’s physical impairments was insufficient.

At step three, a claimant is disabled if the claimant’s impairments meet or medically equal a listed impairment.

Collins v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2022-01-12(a)(4)(iii)

At the third step in the disability evaluation process, a plaintiff will be found disabled if his impairments meet or equal a listing in the Listing of Impairments. ... At step three, the ALJ properly found that Plaintiff’s spinal impairment did not meet or equal Listing 1.04, including 1.04(A) and 1.04(C), and this finding is supported by substantial evidence.

Section 404.1520(d) provides that a claimant is disabled without further inquiry when an impairment meets or equals a listed impairment.

Stuart v. Kijakazi · filed 2022-03-30(d)

At step three of the sequential evaluation process, the ALJ considers whether one or more of the claimant’s impairments meets or equals an impairment listed in Appendix 1 to Subpart P of the regulations. 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.15920(a)(4)(iii), 416.920(a)(4)(iii). ... If a claimant’s condition meets or equals a Listing, the claimant is considered disabled without further inquiry. 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1520(d), 416.920(d). ... The Court finds the ALJ did not err. ... There is no indication in the record that Plaintiff experienced very serious physical limitations from her lesions for any extended period of time. Therefore, Plaintiff has not met the burden of proof to demonstrate that her condition meets or equals a listing.

Section 404.1520(a)(4)(iii) provides that a claimant is disabled at step three when the claimant's impairments meet or equal a listed impairment.

Gray v. Commissioner of Social Security Administration · filed 2022-12-01(a)(4)(iii)

To determine whether an individual has a disability, a five-step sequential analysis is applied. 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1520, 416.920. ... At step three of the disability evaluation process, a claimant will be found disabled if her impairments meet or equal one of the listings in the Listing of Impairments. 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520(a)(4)(iii).

Section 404.1520(a)(4)(iii) requires an ALJ at step three to determine whether the claimant’s medically determinable impairments, considered in combination, meet or medically equal a listed impairment.

INGLING v. COMMISSIONER OF SOCIAL SECURITY · filed 2024-06-24(a)(4)(iii)

At step three, an ALJ considers whether the combination of the claimant’s medically determinable impairments meets or medically equals the severity of any of the impairments in the Listing of Impairments. 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520(a)(4)(iii).

At Step Three under § 404.1520(a)(3), an ALJ may rely on a sufficient Step Two analysis together with a separate discussion of medical opinions without restating the earlier analysis.

Boarman · filed 2025-10-15(a)(3)

While the ALJ’s paragraph discussing Doctors Hanna and Laboy’s findings was itself sufficient, he also cited his Step Two analysis (which he referred to as “Finding 3”) to support his position. ... Accordingly, the ALJ did not need to restate his Step Two analysis. His reference to that prior analysis was sufficient. ... But the analysis in the ALJ’s Step Two discussion and the paragraph discussing Doctors Hanna and Laboy’s opinions was sufficient to satisfy 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520.