20 C.F.R. § 404.1520

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

Christensen v. Saul · filed 2022-09-27

The ALJ follows a five-step sequential evaluation process in determining whether an individual is disabled. See 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520; Bowen v. Yuckert, 482 U.S. 137, 140 (1987).

At step two, § 404.1520 requires the ALJ to consider the combined severity of a claimant’s medically determinable physical and mental impairments.

Spearman v. Social Security Administration, Commissioner · filed 2022-09-30(a)(4)(ii)

The second step of the sequential disability evaluation requires the ALJ to consider the combined severity of the claimant’s medically determinable physical and mental impairments. 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1520(a)(4)(ii), 416.920(a)(4)(ii). A medically determinable impairment is severe if it significantly limits a claimant’s physical or mental abilities to do basic work activities and lasts at least twelve months. See id. ... Therefore, the ALJ satisfied step two of the sequential disability analysis. Mr. Spearman’s argument that the ALJ erred by not categorizing additional impairments as severe fails.

Section 404.1520 establishes a five-step process for determining whether a claimant is disabled, including sequential assessments of substantial gainful activity, severe impairment, listed impairments, residual functional capacity and past work, and other work in the national economy.

ZAMLOUT v. COMMISSIONER OF SOCIAL SECURITY · filed 2022-10-28

Regulations promulgated under the Act establish a five-step process for determining whether a claimant is disabled for purposes of disability insurance. 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520.

Section 404.1520(a)(4)(v) requires the Commissioner at step five to determine whether a claimant can adjust to other work in the national economy based on the claimant’s residual functional capacity, age, education, and work experience.

Boccanfuso v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2022-11-07(a)(4)(v)

At step five, the Commissioner must consider the assessment of the RFC combined with the claimant’s age, education, and work experience to determine whether the claimant can make an adjustment to other work. ... If the claimant cannot make an adjustment to other work, a finding of disabled is warranted. ... At this step, the burden temporarily shifts to the Commissioner to show other jobs exist in significant numbers in the national economy which, given the claimant’s impairments, the claimant can perform. ... 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520(a)(4)(v).

Section 404.1520 requires the Commissioner to use a five-step sequential evaluation process to determine whether a claimant is disabled, including considering residual functional capacity at the later steps.

Robinson v. Comm'r of Soc. Sec. · filed 2022-11-22(a)(4)

The Commissioner uses a five-step sequential evaluation process to determine whether a claimant has a qualifying disability. 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520(a)(4). ... Central to Robinson’s appeal, between steps three and four of the evaluation process, the Commissioner determined Robinson’s “residual functional capacity” (“RFC”). RFC measures the most physical and mental work an individual can do despite any limitations or impairments. 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1520(e), 404.1545(a)(1). The Commissioner then factored Robinson’s RFC into its analysis at steps four and five, where he determined whether Robinson could perform any past relevant work—step four—or other work considering her RFC as well as her age, education, and work experience—step five. See 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1520(a)(4), 404.1545(a)(5).

Section 404.1520 requires an ALJ evaluating disability to use a five-step sequential inquiry covering substantial gainful activity, severe impairment, Listing-level impairment, past relevant work, and the ability to work in the national economy.

Orlow v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2022-12-14

When determining whether an individual is disabled,6 an ALJ must follow the five-step sequential inquiry set forth in the Code of Federal Regulations (“Regulations”), determining as appropriate whether the claimant (1) is currently employed or engaging in substantial gainful activity; (2) has a severe impairment; (3) has an impairment or combination of impairments that meets or medically equals one listed in the Regulations; (4) can perform past relevant work; and (5) retains the ability to perform any work in the national economy. 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520; see also Simon v. Comm’r, Soc. Sec. Admin., 7 F.4th 1094, 1101-02 (11th Cir. 2021) (citations omitted); Phillips v. Barnhart, 357 F.3d 1232, 1237 (11th Cir. 2004).

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

Davenport v. O'Malley · filed 2022-12-30(a)(4)(i)-(v)

The Commissioner has established a five-step sequential analysis to determine whether a claimant satisfies the above criteria. See 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520(a)(4)(i)-(v). At step one, the Commissioner considers the claimant’s work activity. 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520(a)(4)(i). If the claimant is engaged in “substantial gainful activity,” the Commissioner must find that the claimant is not disabled. 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520(b). ... At step three, the Commissioner compares the claimant’s impairment to severe impairments recognized by the Commissioner to be so severe as to preclude a person from engaging in substantial gainful activity. 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520(a)(4)(iii). If the impairment is as severe or more severe than one of the enumerated impairments, the Commissioner must find the claimant disabled and award benefits. 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520(d). ... At step four, the Commissioner considers whether, in view of the claimant’s RFC, the claimant is capable of performing work that he or she has performed in the past (past relevant work). 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520(a)(4)(iv). If the claimant is capable of performing past relevant work, the Commissioner must find that the claimant is not disabled. 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520(f). If the claimant is incapable of performing such work, the analysis proceeds to step five. ... At step five, the Commissioner considers whether, in view of the claimant’s RFC, the claimant is capable of performing other work in the national economy. 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520(a)(4)(v). In making this determination, the Commissioner must also consider vocational factors such as the claimant’s age, education, and past work experience. Id. If the claimant is capable of adjusting to other work, the Commissioner must find that the claimant is not disabled. 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520(g)(1). If the claimant is not capable of adjusting to other work, the analysis concludes with a finding that the claimant is disabled and is therefore entitled to benefits. Id.

Section 404.1520 sets out a five-step sequential evaluation of disability claims, and the ALJ need not reach Step Five when the claimant has not shown at Step Four that she cannot perform her past relevant work.

Johnson v. Social Security Administration Commissioner · filed 2023-01-11(a)-(f)

To determine whether the adult claimant suffers from a disability, the Commissioner uses the familiar five-step sequential evaluation. ... Plaintiff, not the ALJ, has the burden at Step Four. ... Because Plaintiff did not meet her burden at Step Four of demonstrating she cannot perform her PRW, the ALJ was not required to address Step Five or the Grids.

Section 404.1520 requires the ALJ to stop the sequential disability analysis at step four when the claimant can perform past relevant work, so age is considered only if the analysis proceeds to step five.

Witt v. SSA · filed 2023-02-08(a)(4)(iv)

Ms. Witt’s age would only have been part of the analysis if ALJ Francis had continued to step five. See 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1520(a)(4)(iv)–(v), 404.1520(g)(1). Because ALJ Francis found Ms. Witt to not be disabled at step four, she properly concluded the analysis there. Id. 404.1520(a)(4).

Section 404.1520(a)(4)(iii) treats a claimant as disabled at step three when the impairment meets the durational requirements and meets or equals a listed impairment.

BURKE v. COMMISSIONER OF SOCIAL SECURITY · filed 2023-02-14(a)(4)(iii)

At the third step in the sequential evaluation process, a claimant will be considered disabled where a claimant has an impairment or combination of impairments that meet(s) durational requirements and meet(s) or equal(s) the criteria for Listed Impairments. 20 C.FR. §§ 404.1520(a)(4) (iii), 416.920(a)(4)(iii). ... Here, the ALJ provided sufficient reasoning and clarity in his step-three findings for the Court to determine his decision was based on substantial evidence.

Section 404.1520 requires an ALJ to evaluate a disability claim through a five-step sequential process, including whether the claimant worked, had a severe impairment, met a listing, could perform past work, and could perform other work in the national economy.

Quattlebaum v. Kijakazi · filed 2023-02-16

The ALJ is required to evaluate a claimant’s disability determination using a five-step sequential evaluation process. See 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520. “Under this process, an ALJ evaluates, in sequence, whether the claimant: ‘(1) worked during the alleged period of disability; (2) had a severe impairment; (3) had an impairment that met or equaled the requirements of a listed impairment; (4) could return to her past relevant work; and (5) if not, could perform any other work in the national economy.’” Kiser v. Saul, 821 F. App’x 211, 212 (4th Cir. 2020) (citation omitted) (quoting Hancock v. Astrue, 667 F.3d 470, 472 (4th Cir. 2012)). ... I find the ALJ properly evaluated Plaintiff’s claim using the five-step sequential process and complied with relevant regulations and caselaw.

Section 404.1520 requires an ALJ at steps two and three to determine whether the claimant has a severe impairment or combination of impairments and whether an impairment reaches the level of a conclusively disabling listed impairment.

Wolford v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2023-02-27(a), (c)

Steps two and three of the disability determination process require an ALJ to determine whether a claimant has a recognized severe impairment or combination of impairments that rise to severe, or if not, whether any of her impairments rise to the same level so as to be conclusively disabling. 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1520(a), (c). A severe impairment “significantly limits” a claimant’s “physical or mental ability to do basic work activities.” Id.

Section 404.1520(a)(4) requires the Commissioner to evaluate disability claims through a five-step sequential process.

CRUZ v. COMMISSIONER OF SOCIAL SECURITY · filed 2022-12-28(a)(4)

The Commissioner employs a five-step sequential evaluation process for disability claims. See 20 CFR. § 404.1520(a)(4).

Section 404.1520(a)(4) establishes a five-step sequential evaluation for determining disability, covering work activity, impairment severity, listed impairments, past relevant work, and other work.

SHISSLER v. KIJAKAZI · filed 2023-01-09(a)(4)

The proper legal standard for assessing disability is a five-step sequential evaluation process that considers whether a claimant: (1) is working, (2) has a severe impairment, (3) has an impairment that meets or medically equals the requirements of an impairment listed in the regulations and is considered per se disabling, (4) can return to his past relevant work, and (5) if not, whether he can perform other work. See 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520(a)(4).

Section 404.1520 requires the Commissioner to evaluate each claim for benefits using a five-step sequential analysis.

Neeley v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2023-02-17

The regulations require the Commissioner to evaluate each claim for benefits using a five-step sequential analysis. 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1520; 416.920.

At step five, § 404.1520(a)(4)(v) requires consideration of the claimant’s residual functional capacity, age, education, and work experience to determine whether the claimant can perform other work existing in significant numbers.

Ward v. Commissioner of Social Security Administration · filed 2023-03-09(a)(4)(v)

When the ALJ determines that the claimant cannot perform past relevant work at step four, she proceeds to step five to determine whether the claimant is able to do any other work that exists in “significant numbers” in the national or local economies. See 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1520, 416.920. This determination considers the claimant’s RFC, age, education, and work experience. Id. ... The challenge is denied because the testimony was reliable and constituted substantial evidence to support a finding that significant numbers of jobs were available to Mr. Ward.

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

Darity v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2023-03-09(a)(4)(iii)

At step three of the five-step sequential evaluation process, the ALJ considers whether a claimant’s impairments meet or equal a listed impairment. 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520(a)(4)(iii). ... This evidence provides a coherent basis for the ALJ’s determination that Darity’s condition is not medically equal to a listing in 14.00, specifically that she was able to reduce the frequency of events, and the interference with daily activities, by controlling triggers and with medication. ... Therefore, the ALJ did not commit reversible error in finding that Plaintiff’s hereditary angioedema did not meet or medically equal Listing 14.07.

Section 404.1520's sequential evaluation permits denial at step two for a non-severe impairment and requires proceeding to step five when the claimant cannot perform past work but may perform other work in the national economy.

Pumroy v. O'Malley · filed 2023-03-10(a)(4)(ii), (a)(4)(v)

Step Two: Does the claimant have a medically-severe impairment or combination of impairments? 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1520(a)(4)(ii), 416.920(a)(4)(ii). ... If the claimant does not have a severe impairment or combination of impairments, the disability claim is denied. Id. § 404.1520(a)(4)(ii), 416.920(a)(4)(ii). ... Step Five: Is the claimant able to perform other work in the national economy in view of their age, education, and work experience? 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1520(a)(4)(v), 416.920(a)(4)(v). ... Here, the ALJ’s step five analysis is supported by substantial evidence in the record.

Section 404.1520 uses a five-step disability inquiry: step two asks whether the claimant has a severe impairment, step three asks whether it meets or equals a listed impairment, and the inquiry ends when a step establishes that the claimant is not disabled.

Reddin v. Kijakazi · filed 2023-03-15(a)(4)

The Commissioner employs a five-step process to determine if a claimant was disabled during the relevant time period: (1) whether the claimant performed substantial gainful activity; (2) whether the claimant had a severe impairment; (3) whether the impairment meets or equals an impairment listed in the relevant regulations; (4) whether the impairment prevented the claimant from doing past relevant work; and (5) whether the impairment prevented the claimant from performing any other substantial gainful activity. If at any step the Commissioner determines that the claimant was not disabled, the inquiry ends. ... First, it appears that Reddin has conflated steps two and three of the relevant inquiry. Step two of the inquiry analyzes whether a claimant has a severe impairment, while step three determines whether that impairment meets or equals one of the listed impairments in in 20 C.F.R. Pt. 404, Subpart P, Appendix 1. ... To satisfy step three, a claimant must meet all of the specified medical criteria in the C.F.R. Pt. 404, Subpart P, Appendix 1 listing.

Section 404.1520 requires an ALJ evaluating disability to use a five-step sequential inquiry addressing work activity, severe impairment, listed impairments, past relevant work, and other work in the national economy.

Jones v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2023-03-15

When determining whether an individual is disabled,5 an ALJ must follow the five-step sequential inquiry set forth in the Regulations, determining as appropriate whether the claimant (1) is currently employed or engaging in substantial gainful activity; (2) has a severe impairment; (3) has an impairment or combination of impairments that meets or medically equals one listed in the Regulations; (4) can perform past relevant work; and (5) retains the ability to perform any work in the national economy. 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1520, 416.920; see also Simon v. Comm’r, Soc. Sec. Admin., 7 F.4th 1094, 1101-02 (11th Cir. 2021) (citations omitted); Phillips v. Barnhart, 357 F.3d 1232, 1237 (11th Cir. 2004). ... Here, the ALJ followed the five-step inquiry.

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

Garza v. Commissioner, Social Security Administration · filed 2023-03-16

In evaluating a disability claim, an ALJ performs a five-step analysis to determine whether: “(1) the claimant is presently working; (2) the claimant has a severe impairment; (3) the impairment meets or equals an impairment listed in [A]ppendix 1 of the [S]ocial [SJecurity regulations; (4) the impairment prevents the claimant from doing past relevant work; and (5) the impairment prevents the claimant from doing any other substantial gainful activity.” Audler, 501 F.3d at 447-48; see 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520.

Section 404.1520(a)(4) directs an ALJ to determine disability through five sequential steps, including whether the impairment meets a listed impairment and whether the claimant can perform other work.

Morales v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2023-03-23(a)(4)

In determining a claimant’s disability, an ALI proceeds through a five-step sequential process by assessing: (1} whether the claimant is currently engaged in substantial gainful activity; (2) whether the claimant has any severe medically determinable impairments; (3) whether those impairments meet or exceed the severity of an impairment listed in 20 C.F.R. Part 404, Subpart P, Appendix 1; (4) whether the claimant’s impairments prevent them from performing past relevant work; and (5) whether their impairments prevent them from doing any other work.

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

Edwards v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2023-03-27(a)(4)

The Commissioner has promulgated regulations that set forth a five-step sequential evaluation process that an ALJ must follow in evaluating whether an individual is disabled. 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520 (2022). ... (5) Does the claimant’s RFC, age, education, and work experience allow him or her to make an adjustment to other work? If the answer is “yes,” the claimant is not disabled. If the answer is “no,” the claimant is disabled. 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520(a)(4).

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

Brown v. Kijakazi (CONSENT) · filed 2023-03-28

Disability under the Act is determined under a five-step sequential evaluation process. See 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520. The evaluation is made at the hearing conducted by an administrative law judge (“ALJ”). See Washington v. Comm’r of Soc. Sec., 906 F.3d 1353, 1359 (11th Cir. 2018). First, the ALJ must determine whether the claimant is currently engaged in substantial gainful activity. 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520(b). “Substantial gainful activity” is work activity that involves significant physical or mental activities. 20 C.F.R. § 404.1572(a). If the ALJ finds that the claimant is engaged in substantial gainful activity, the claimant cannot claim disability. 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520(b). Second, the ALJ must determine whether the claimant has a medically determinable impairment or a combination of impairments that significantly limit the claimant’s ability to perform basic work activities. 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520(c). Absent such impairment, the claimant may not claim disability. Id. Third, the ALJ must determine whether the claimant meets or medically equals the criteria of an impairment listed in 20 C.F.R. § 404, Subpart P, Appendix 1. If such criteria are met, then the claimant is declared disabled. 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520(d). ... At the fourth step, the ALJ must determine the claimant’s residual functional capacity (“RFC”), which refers to the claimant’s ability to work despite his impairments. 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520(e). The ALJ must determine whether the claimant has the RFC to perform past relevant work. 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520(f). If it is determined that the claimant is capable of performing past relevant work, then the claimant is not disabled. 20 C.F.R. § 404.1560(b)(3). If the ALJ finds that the claimant is unable to perform past relevant work, then the analysis proceeds to the fifth and final step. 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520(g)(1). In this final analytical step, the ALJ must decide whether the claimant is able to perform any other relevant work corresponding with his RFC, age, education, and work experience. 20 C.F.R. § 404.1560(c).

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

Anderson v. Kijakazi · filed 2023-04-25(c)

At step two of the sequential evaluation, the issue is whether the claimant suffers from at least one “severe” medically determinable impairment. An impairment is “severe” if it “significantly limits [a claimant’s] physical or mental ability to do basic work activities.” ... As noted, the ALJ concluded that Plaintiff had no physical limitations and, therefore, could perform a full range of work at all exertional levels. ... The Court finds that the ALJ’s assessment of Plaintiff’s physical impairments is supported by substantial evidence. ... There is no evidence that these degenerative changes significantly limit Plaintiff’s ability to do basic work activities. ... Therefore, the Court finds that the ALJ applied the correct legal standard and her decision on this point is supported by substantial evidence.

At step two, an ALJ determines whether an impairment is severe and meets the duration requirement; if any impairment is severe, the ALJ proceeds through the sequential evaluation and considers the effects of each impairment on the claimant's ability to work.

Hundley v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2023-04-27(a)(4)(ii), (c)

“At step two of the five-step sequential evaluation, the ALJ determines if the claimant has an impairment, or a combination of impairments, that is severe and meets the duration requirement.” Sharon W. v. Comm’r, Soc. Sec. Admin., No. SAG-18-2707, 2019 WL 2234499, at *1 (D. Md. May 23, 2019) (citing 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520(a)(4)(ii)). ... If, however, the ALJ finds any impairment to be severe, “the ALJ continues with the sequential evaluation and considers how each of the claimant’s impairments impacts her ability to perform work.” Sharon W., 2019 WL 2234499, at *1 (citing 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520). ... Here, it is clear from the opinion that ALJ considered Plaintiff’s knee impairment in the RFC after deeming it non-severe at step two. ... Thus, remand is not warranted on this issue.

Section 404.1520 requires the Commissioner to use a five-step sequential process to determine disability, considering employment, severe impairments, listed impairments, past relevant work, and other work.

Napolitano v. Kijakazi · filed 2023-05-02(a)(4)

The Social Security Administration has outlined a ‘five-step, sequential evaluation process’ to determine whether a claimant is disabled[.] Estrella v. Berryhill, 925 F.3d 90, 94 (2d Cir. 2019) (citations omitted); 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520(a)(4). First, the Commissioner must establish whether the claimant is presently employed. 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520(a)(4)(i). If the claimant is unemployed, the Commissioner goes to the second step and determines whether the claimant has a “severe” impairment restricting his or her ability to work. 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520(a)(4)(ii). If the claimant has such an impairment, the Commissioner moves to the third step and considers whether the medical severity of the impairment “meets or equals” a listing in Appendix One of Subpart P of the regulations. 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520(a)(4)(iii). If so, the claimant is considered disabled. Id.; 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520(d). ... If the claimant’s impairment does not meet or equal a listed impairment, then the Commissioner continues to the fourth step and determines whether the claimant has the RFC to perform his or her past relevant work. 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520(a)(4)(iv). Finally, if the claimant does not have the RFC to perform past relevant work, the Commissioner completes the fifth step and ascertains whether the claimant possesses the ability to perform any other work. 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520(a)(4)(v).

Section 404.1520 requires disability claims to be evaluated through five sequential steps addressing work activity, severity, listed impairments, past work, and other work in the national economy.

(SS) Anderson v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2023-05-04

To achieve uniformity of decisions, the Commissioner employs a five-step sequential evaluation process to determine whether a claimant is disabled. See 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1520 (a)-(f) and 416.920(a)-(f). The sequential evaluation proceeds as follows: ... Step 1 Determination whether the claimant is engaged in substantial gainful activity; if so, the claimant is presumed not disabled and the claim is denied; ... Step 2 If the claimant is not engaged in substantial gainful activity, determination whether the claimant has a severe impairment; if not, the claimant is presumed not disabled and the claim is denied; ... Step 3 If the claimant has one or more severe impairments, determination whether any such severe impairment meets or medically equals an impairment listed in the regulations; if the claimant has such an impairment, the claimant is presumed disabled and the claim is granted; ... Step 4 If the claimant’s impairment is not listed in the regulations, determination whether the impairment prevents the claimant from performing past work in light of the claimant’s residual functional capacity; if not, the claimant is presumed not disabled and the claim is denied; ... Step 5 If the impairment prevents the claimant from performing past work, determination whether, in light of the claimant’s residual functional capacity, the claimant can engage in other types of substantial gainful work that exist in the national economy; if so, the claimant is not disabled and the claim is denied.

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

Chastain v. Kijakazi · filed 2023-05-15

The SSA has established a five-step, sequential evaluation process for appraising whether a claimant is disabled and benefit-eligible. 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1520, 416.920; see also Sloan v. Saul, 933 F.3d 946, 949 (8th Cir. 2019). The Commissioner must evaluate: (1) whether the claimant is presently engaged in a substantial gainful activity; (2) whether the claimant has a severe impairment that significantly limits the claimant’s physical or mental ability to perform basic work activities; (3) whether the claimant has an impairment that meets or equals a presumptively disabling impairment listed in the regulations; (4) whether the claimant has the residual functional capacity to perform his or her past relevant work; and (5) if the claimant cannot perform the past work, the burden shifts to the Commissioner to prove that there are other jobs in the national economy that the claimant can perform.

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

Barker v. Kijakazi · filed 2023-05-22

The Commissioner has established a five-step sequential evaluation process for determining whether a claimant is disabled. 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520.

Section 404.1520 establishes a five-step sequential process for determining disability, including comparison of the claimant’s impairment with listed impairments at step three.

Andrews v. Kijakazi · filed 2023-06-07(a)(4)(iii)

The Commissioner has established a five-step sequential analysis to determine whether a claimant satisfies the above criteria. See 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1520(a)(4)(i)–(v), 416.920(a)(4)(i)–(v). ... At step three, the Commissioner compares the claimant’s impairment to several impairments recognized by the Commissioner to be so severe as to preclude a person from engaging in substantial gainful activity. 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1520(a)(4)(iii), 416.920(a)(4)(iii). ... Here, the ALJ considered the Listing at issue and found Plaintiff did not satisfy the requirements of the criteria. Tr. 19–21. ... Therefore, this is not a basis to find error at step three.

Section 404.1520(a)(4)(iv) and (f) require the ALJ to conclude that a claimant is not disabled when the claimant can perform past relevant work, so the sequential evaluation need not proceed to step five.

Grable v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2023-06-20(a)(4)(iv) & (f)

If the claimant can return to her past relevant work, the ALJ will conclude that the claimant is not disabled.

Section 404.1520(a)(4) ends the sequential evaluation when a claimant is found not disabled at a step, so later-step issues need not be reached.

Daigle v. Kijakazi · filed 2023-07-12(a)(4)

Challenges to this alternative step five finding are moot because the ALJ (properly) determined at step four that Daigle was not disabled; accordingly, the evaluation process terminated at that step. See 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520(a)(4). We thus need not and do not reach Daigle’s challenge to the ALJ’s alternative step five findings.

Section 404.1520 sets out a five-step sequential evaluation for determining entitlement to disability benefits, including consideration of substantial gainful activity, severity, listed impairments, residual functional capacity, past work, and other work in the national economy.

WASHINGTON v. COMMISSIONER OF SOCIAL SECURITY · filed 2023-08-29

Under the authority of the SSA, the Social Security Administration (the “Administration”) has established a five-step evaluation process for determining whether a claimant is entitled to benefits. ... This Court’s review necessarily incorporates a determination of whether the ALJ properly followed the five-step process, which is prescribed by regulation. ... Step 1: Determine whether the claimant has engaged in substantial gainful activity since the onset date of the alleged disability. ... Step 2: Determine if the claimant’s alleged impairment, or combination of impairments, is “severe.” ... Step 3: Determine whether the severe impairment meets or equals the criteria of any impairment found in the Listing of Impairments. ... RFC and Step 4: Determine the claimant’s “residual functional capacity” (“RFC”), meaning “the most [the claimant] can still do despite [her] limitations.” ... Decide whether, based on his RFC, the claimant can return to her prior occupation. ... Step 5: At this point, the burden shifts to the Administration to demonstrate that the claimant, considering his age, education, work experience, and RFC, is capable of performing jobs that exist in significant numbers in the national economy. ... If so, benefits will be denied; if not, they will be awarded.

Section 404.1520(a) requires the Commissioner to evaluate disability claims through a five-step sequential process.

Williams v. Kijakazi · filed 2023-09-12(a)

In evaluating whether a claimant is disabled as defined in the Social Security Act, the Commissioner follows a five-step sequential evaluation process. Hess v. Comm’r Soc. Sec., 931 F.3d 198, 200-01 (3d Cir. 2019); 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520(a).

Section 404.1520(a)(4) sets out a five-step sequential evaluation for determining whether a claimant is disabled.

Sharp v. SSA · filed 2023-09-18(a)(4)

The ALJ conducts a five-step analysis to determine if a plaintiff is disabled. See 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520(a)(4). In this evaluation, the ALJ considers all evidence in the plaintiff’s case record. Id. at (3). At Step 1, the ALJ considers whether the claimant is doing substantial gainful activity. Id. at (4)(i). At Step 2, the ALJ considers the medical severity of the claimant’s disability. Id. at (4)(ii). At Step 3, the ALJ again considers the medical severity of the claimant’s disability, this time considering whether the impairments meet or equal one listed in Appendix 1 of Subpart P. Id. at (4)(iii). At Step 4, the ALJ will consider the claimant’s residual functional capacity and past relevant work. Id. at (4)(iv). Finally, at Step 5, the ALJ will consider whether the claimant can make adjustments to other work considering his or her residual functional capacity, age, education, and work experience. Id. at (4)(v). If at any step the ALJ determines that the claimant is not disabled, the analysis ends there. Richardson v. Saul, 511 F. Supp. 3d 791, 797 (E.D. Ky. 2021) (citing § 404.1520(a)(4)).

Section 404.1520(a) requires an ALJ to use a five-step sequential analysis to determine disability, including assessing residual functional capacity and, if the claimant cannot perform past work, considering other work in the national economy.

Rodgers v. Saul · filed 2023-03-30(a)

The ALJ must perform the following sequential analysis: (1) whether the claimant is “doing substantial gainful activity”; (2) whether claimant has a “severe, medically determinable physical or mental impairment . . . or a combination of impairments that is severe” and that lasted for more than 12 months; and (3) whether the impairment “meets or equals” one of the listings in the regulations. 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520(a)(4)(i)-(iii). If the applicant’s impairment meets or equals a listing, the claimant is disabled. § 404.1520(a)(4)(iii). If the impairment does not meet or equal a listing, the ALJ must determine the claimant’s residual functional capacity (“RFC”). § 404.1520(a)(4)(iv), (e). A claimant’s RFC is the most he can still do in a work setting despite impairments. § 404.1545(a). The ALJ must determine whether the applicant retains RFC to perform past relevant work. § 404.1520(a)(4)(iv). If the applicant cannot perform past relevant work, the ALJ must determine at step five whether the applicant can perform any other work that exists in the national economy. § 404.1520(a)(4)(v). The burden of proof is on the claimant at steps one through four, but shifts to the Commissioner at step five. Bray, 554 F.3d at 1222-23.

Section 404.1520 directs the sequential disability evaluation: at step one, substantial gainful activity can preclude disability, and at step two, an impairment is severe only if it significantly limits the ability to perform work activities.

Udal v. Commissioner Social Security Administration · filed 2023-05-10(b), (c)

At step one of the sequential evaluation, the ALJ evaluates whether a claimant engaged in substantial gainful activity. 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1520(b), 416.920(b). The ALJ will not find a claimant disabled if they are found to have engaged in substantial gainful activity. Barnhart v. Thomas, 540 U.S. 20, 24 (2003). ... Here, the record shows that Plaintiff worked at Costco during a three-month period, averaging more than 1,100.00 dollars each month. Tr. 15, 279. ... Given that evidence, the ALJ reasonably determined that Plaintiff’s work at Costco from April 1, 2005, to June 30, 2005, was not an unsuccessful work attempt. Tr. 16. ... A “severe impairment” is any impairment or condition that significantly limits one’s ability to perform work functions or activities. 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1520(c), 416.920(c). Here, Plaintiff has not met their burden of demonstrating such an impairment exists for the statutory twelve-month period. 42 U.S.C. § 423(d)(1)(A); 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1505, 404.1509, 416.905, 416.909. ... Because of this lack of convincing evidence, the ALJ reasonably concluded Plaintiff was not severely impaired. Tr. 19.

Section 404.1520(a)(4) requires disability claims to be evaluated through a five-step sequence, including assessment of severe impairments, listed impairments, residual functional capacity, and past relevant work.

Burke v. Social Security Administration · filed 2023-08-02(a)(4)

ALJs must employ a “five-step sequential evaluation process” to determine whether a claimant is disabled, proceeding through each step until a determination can be reached. 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520(a)(4).

Section 404.1520(a)(4) requires the Social Security Administration to determine disability eligibility through a five-step sequential analysis.

Sanchez v. Social Security Administration · filed 2023-09-25(a)(4)

The Administration must apply a five-step analysis to determine eligibility for benefits. 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520(a)(4).

Section 404.1520 establishes the five-step sequential process used to determine whether a claimant is disabled.

Hoefelman v. Social Security Administration, Commissioner · filed 2023-09-26

While 42 U.S.C. § 423(d)(1)(A) does define “disability,” the ALJ nonetheless follows the five-step sequential process established in 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1520 and 416.920(a) in determining whether a claimant is disabled.

Section 404.1520 requires a five-step disability evaluation, including a step-two severity determination, and a failure to identify an additional impairment at step two is harmless when at least one severe impairment is found and the evaluation proceeds.

Wycoff v. Social Security Administration · filed 2023-09-27(a)(4)(ii), (c)

The ALJ considers the “medical severity” of a claimant’s impairments at step two of the sequential evaluation. 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520(a)(4)(ii). An impairment is “severe” if it significantly limits a claimant’s ability to perform work activities. 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520(c). A claimant who does not have a severe medically determinable impairment, or a combination of impairments that is severe, is not disabled. 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520(a)(4)(ii). ... Since the ALJ found Claimant had at least one severe impairment and proceeded to the subsequent steps of his analysis, any failure in identifying additional medically determinable impairments at step two does not constitute reversible error.

Section 404.1520 requires the Commissioner to use the claimant’s residual functional capacity to determine at steps four and five whether the claimant can perform past relevant work or adjust to other work.

WOOD v. COMMISSIONER OF SOCIAL SECURITY · filed 2023-09-29(a)(4)(iv-v)

That error, coupled with the ALJ’s failure to consider Susan’s tinnitus, hearing loss, and TMJ, undermines the ALJ’s findings at steps four and five on Susan’s ability to work because those findings depend on the RFC determination. 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520(a)(4)(iv-v) (requiring the Commissioner to consider the RFC assessment to determine whether claimant can perform past relevant work or make an adjustment to other work).

Section 404.1520(g)(1) requires vocational-expert testimony about other available work to be predicated on a supportable residual functional capacity assessment.

Rivera-Torres v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2023-10-17(g)(1)

In other words, a VE’s testimony must be predicated on a supportable RFC assessment. See 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520(g)(1) (emphasis added).

Section 404.1520(d) requires an ALJ at step three to determine whether a claimant’s impairment or combination of impairments meets or equals a listed impairment; if it does, the impairment is per se disabling.

Carver v. Commissioner Social Security Administration · filed 2023-10-19(d)

At step three, the ALJ determines whether a claimant’s impairment or combination of impairments meets or equals the criteria for a listed impairment in 20 C.F.R. Part 404, Subpart P, Appendix 1. Where an impairment does so, it is per se disabling and the ALJ has no discretion in awarding benefits. 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1520(d), 416.920(d); Young v. Sullivan, 911 F.2d 180, 183 (9th Cir. 1990).

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

Qosaj v. Kijakazi · filed 2023-10-30

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

Section 404.1520(a)(4) requires disability claims to be evaluated through a five-step sequence: substantial gainful activity, severe impairment, listed impairment, past relevant work, and other work considering the claimant's age, education, and experience.

Richardson v. Social Security Administration Commissioner · filed 2023-11-06(a)(4)

The Commissioner’s regulations require her to apply a five-step sequential evaluation process to each claim for disability benefits: (1) whether the claimant has engaged in substantial gainful activity since filing her claim; (2) whether the claimant has a severe physical and/or mental impairment or combination of impairments; (3) whether the impairment(s) meet or equal an impairment in the listings; (4) whether the impairment(s) prevent the claimant from doing past relevant work; and, (5) whether the claimant is able to perform other work in the national economy given her age, education, and experience. See 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520(a)(4).

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

Genelle D. v. Kijakazi · filed 2023-11-15

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

Section 404.1520 requires an ALJ to use a five-step approach when determining whether a claimant is disabled.

Silvas v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2023-11-29

As outlined above, the proper legal standard when determining whether the claimant has a “disability” is the five-step approach found in 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520.

Section 404.1520(a)(4)(v) places the burden on the Commissioner at step five to show that a claimant can adjust to other work existing in significant numbers in the national economy after considering the claimant's residual functional capacity, age, education, and work experience.

Shafor v. Commissioner Social Security Administration · filed 2023-12-05(a)(4)(v)

The Social Security Administration utilizes a five-step sequential evaluation to determine whether a claimant is disabled. 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1520(a)(4), 416.920(a)(4) (2012). The burden of proof rests on the claimant for steps one through four, and on the Commissioner for step five. Bustamante v. Massanari, 262 F.3d 949, 953–54 (9th Cir. 2001) (citing Tackett v. Apfel, 180 F.3d 1094, 1098 (9th Cir. 1999)). At step five, the Commissioner’s burden is to demonstrate that the claimant can make an adjustment to other work existing in significant numbers in the national economy after considering the claimant’s residual functional capacity (“RFC”), age, education, and work experience. 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520(a)(4)(v). If the Commissioner fails to meet this burden, then the claimant is considered disabled. Id.

Section 404.1520 requires the ALJ at Step Two to determine whether a claimant's impairment significantly limits the ability to perform basic work activities and is therefore severe.

Spinato v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2023-12-11(a)(4)(ii), (c)

The Social Security Administration’s regulations require ALJs to follow a five-step sequence in evaluating disability claims. 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520(a)(4). First, the ALJ determines whether the claimant is engaged in substantial gainful activity. Id. § 404.1520(a)(4)(i), (b). If not, then at step two, the ALJ evaluates whether the claimant has a “severe impairment” — i.e., an impairment or combination of impairments that “significantly limits” her “physical or mental ability to do basic work activities” — that has lasted or is expected to last for twelve months or longer. Id. §§ 404.1509, 404.1520(a)(4)(ii), (c).

Section 404.1520(a)(4)(ii) provides that a claimant is not disabled at Step Two when no impairment or combination of impairments significantly limits the ability to perform basic work activities.

Samantha D. v. O'Malley · filed 2023-12-26(a)(4)(ii)

Second, if a claimant does not have any impairment or combination of impairments that significantly limit physical or mental ability to do basic work activities, then the claimant does not have a severe impairment and is not disabled. 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520(a)(4)(ii).

At step three of the sequential evaluation, the ALJ must consider the severity of the claimant's impairments and whether an impairment or combination of impairments meets or equals a listed impairment and the duration requirement.

Kuilan v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2023-12-27(a)(4)(iii)

At step three, the ALJ is required to consider the severity of a claimant’s impairments. 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520(a)(4)(iii). If the claimant has an impairment or combination of impairments that meets or equals one of the listings in the accompanying appendix to the regulation and meets the duration requirement, the claimant will be found to be disabled. Id.

Section 404.1520 establishes a five-step sequential inquiry for determining disability; the steps must be followed in order, and a finding of nondisability at any step ends the inquiry.

Class-Gomez v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2023-12-27(a)(4)

The Act sets forth a five-step inquiry to determine whether a person is disabled. See 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520(a)(4). The steps must be followed in order, and if a person is determined not to be disabled at any step, the inquiry stops. Id.

At Step Two, the Commissioner must determine whether the claimant has a severe medically determinable impairment, and failure to identify one is harmless if its effects are considered in later steps.

Jones v. O'Malley · filed 2024-01-29(a)(4)(ii), (c)

At Step Two of the sequential evaluation process, the ALJ is required to consider whether a claimant has met the burden of demonstrating that his or her impairments are “medically determinable” and whether such impairments are severe. 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1520(a)(4)(ii), 416.920(a)(4)(ii); see also Bowen v. Yuckert, 482 U.S. 137, 146-47 (1987); 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1520(c), 416.920(c). ... Thus, even if the ALJ technically erred in not explicitly including chronic pain syndrome in Step Two, given the ALJ’s extensive inclusion and discussion of Plaintiff’s pain in his subsequent analysis, the ALJ’s failure to include them at Step Two was, at most, a harmless error.

At step three, the claimant bears the burden to show that an impairment meets or medically equals a listed impairment; meeting all listing criteria establishes disability, while failure to do so moves the evaluation to step four.

Teschner v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2024-02-18(a)(4)(iii)

At step three of the sequential evaluation process, plaintiff carries the burden to show that he has an impairment or combination of impairments that meets or medically equals the criteria of an impairment listed in 20 C.F.R. § 404, Subpart P, App. 1. Foster v. Halter, 279 F.3d 348, 354 (6th Cir. 2001); 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520(a)(4)(iii). If a claimant meets all of the criteria of a listed impairment, he is disabled; otherwise, the evaluation proceeds to step four. 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1520(d)-(e); Bowen v. Yuckert, 482 U.S. 137, 141 (1987); see also Rabbers, 582 F.3d at 653 (citing 20 C.F.R. § 404.1525(c)(3)) (“A claimant must satisfy all of the criteria to meet the listing.”).

At step two, § 404.1520(c) treats an impairment as severe only if it significantly limits basic work activities, but the ALJ must continue the evaluation and account for non-severe impairments when other severe impairments are found.

Nix v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2024-03-29(c)

A severe impairment under step 2 is defined as “any impairment or combination of impairments which significantly limits [the claimant’s] physical or mental ability to do basic work activities.” §§ 404.1520(c), 416.920(c); see also Barnhart v. Thomas, 540 U.S. 20, 124 S. Ct. 376, 157 L. Ed. 2d 333 (2003). ... Whether a particular ailment is found non-severe at step 2 “is of no consequence” when an ALJ recognizes numerous other severe impairments and is therefore obligated to proceed with remaining steps of the evaluation process. See Castile, 617 F.3d at 927. ... After finding Plaintiff’s COPD was non-severe, the ALJ again weighed its effects along with his other ailments at step 4. The ALJ stated that he considered all of Plaintiff’s medically determinable impairments, including any that were non-severe, when assessing Plaintiff’s RFC. (Doc. 13-2, pg. 20). By including Plaintiff’s non-severe COPD in his RFC analysis, the ALJ met his burden to “consider the aggregate effect of the entire constellations of ailments.” Golembiewski, 322 F.3d at 918.

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

Fisher v. O'Malley · filed 2024-03-29(a)(4)(ii)

At step 2 of the evaluation process, the ALJ must determine if a claimant suffers from a medically determinable impairment or combination of impairments that is severe. See Rouse v. Berryhill, 4:17-cv-2511-DDN, 2019 WL 1359384, at *5 (E.D. Mo. Mar. 26, 2019) (citing 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520(a)(4)(ii)). ... Here, the ALJ properly considered Plaintiff’s alleged hand, wrist, neck, and spine impairments, in addition to Plaintiff’s other alleged impairments. Moreover, as discussed, the ALJ properly considered all relevant evidence in determining Plaintiff’s RFC. Therefore, any potential step 2 error is harmless.

Section 404.1520(a)(4) requires an ALJ to determine disability through a five-step sequence addressing substantial gainful activity, severe impairment, listed impairments, past relevant work, and other work in the national economy.

Baker v. Commissioner of Social Security Administration · filed 2024-06-21(a)(4)

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

Section 404.1520 establishes a five-step sequential process for evaluating disability claims, including whether the claimant can perform past relevant work and other work in the national economy.

Henderson v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2024-07-02(a)(4)(i)-(v)

The Commissioner has promulgated regulations setting forth a five-step sequential evaluation process for evaluating a disability claim. See “Evaluation of disability in general,” 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520. ... The ALJ appropriately utilized the five-step sequential evaluation process that the Commissioner promulgated for evaluating disability claims (Tr. 292-305). See 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520.

Section 404.1520 establishes a five-step sequential process for determining disability, requiring evaluation of substantial gainful activity, impairment severity, listed impairments, residual functional capacity for past work, and the ability to perform other work.

McNeill v. Kijakazi · filed 2024-08-19

The disability determination is based on a five-step sequential evaluation process as set forth in 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520 under which the ALJ is to evaluate a claim: The claimant (1) must not be engaged in “substantial gainful activity [“SGA”],” i.e., currently working; and (2) must have a “severe” impairment that (3) meets or exceeds [in severity] the “listings” of specified impairments, or is otherwise incapacitating to the extent that the claimant does not possess the residual functional capacity [“RFC”] to (4) perform . . . past work or (5) any other work.

Section 404.1520(a)(4) sets out the usual five-step sequential analysis for determining disability on an initial claim, while continuation of previously awarded benefits is assessed under the separate eight-step process.

Scissum v. Social Security Administration, Commissioner · filed 2024-08-27(a)(4)

As explained above, when assessing the continuation of previously awarded disability benefits, an ALJ must apply the eight-step process in 20 C.F.R. § 404.1594(f), rather than the usual five-step process in 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520(a)(4).

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

Phetteplace v. Social Security, Commissioner of · filed 2024-08-29(a)(4)(ii), (c)

Step 2 of the five-step sequential process requires an ALJ to determine if a claimant suffers from any severe impairments. 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520(a)(4)(ii), (c). An impairment is considered severe if it “significantly limits your physical or mental ability to do basic work activities[.]” 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520(c).

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

Olson v. O'Malley · filed 2024-08-30

The Commissioner has established a five-step sequential evaluation process for determining whether a claimant is disabled. 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520.

At steps two and three, the regulation requires the agency to determine whether an impairment is severe before deciding whether it meets or equals a listed impairment.

Gochenour v. O'Malley · filed 2024-08-30(c)–(d)

Because ALJ Munday did not find at step two that Gari had an MDI of “inflammatory arthritis” during the relevant time, there was no reason for her to consider whether this alleged MDI met or medically equaled Listing 14.09 at step three. See 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520(c)–(d).

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

Lyles v. Kijakazi · filed 2024-09-06(a)(4), (c)

As noted above, step two of the sequential analysis requires the ALJ to determine whether the claimant has a severe impairment or combination of impairments. See Hearn v. Comm’r, Soc. Sec. Admin., 619 F. App’x 892, 895 (11th Cir. 2015); Watkins, 457 F. App’x at 870 (citing 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1520(a)(4), (c)-(f), 416.920(a)(4), (c)-(f); Phillips, 357 F.3d at 1237). ... A "finding of any severe impairment, whether or not it results from a single severe impairment or a combination of impairments that together qualify as ‘severe,’ is enough to satisfy step two." ... Finally, even if the ALJ erred by finding that Plaintiff’s tinnitus, bilateral pes planus, and anxiety and depression were non-severe impairments at step two, any such error was harmless because the ALJ preceded to the next steps in the sequential evaluation and considered the combined effects of all impairments, both severe and non-severe, in formulating his RFC. (Doc. 6, PageID.47).

Section 404.1520 requires a claimant to satisfy the applicable Step Three listing criteria to be found disabled at that step; otherwise, the sequential evaluation proceeds to Step Four.

Hunter v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2024-09-10(a)(4)(iii), (d)-(e)

At Step Three, a claimant has the burden to show that she has an impairment or combination of impairments that meets or medically equals the criteria of an impairment listed in 20 C.F.R. § 404, Subpart P, Appendix 1. Foster v. Halter, 279 F.3d 348, 354 (6th Cir. 2001); 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520(a)(4)(iii). If the claimant meets all of the criteria of a listed impairment, she is disabled; otherwise, the evaluation proceeds to Step Four. 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520(d)-(e); Bowen v. Yuckert, 482 U.S. 137, 141 (1987); see also Rabbers v. Comm’r of SSA, 582 F.3d 647, 653 (6th Cir. 2009) (“A claimant must satisfy all of the criteria to meet the listing.”).

Section 404.1520 requires disability to be evaluated through five sequential steps, and a dispositive finding at any step ends the inquiry.

Davis v. Social Security Administration, Commissioner of · filed 2024-09-17

The Commissioner employs a five-step sequential evaluation to determine whether an adult claimant is disabled. 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1520, 416.920. The following five issues are addressed in order: (1) if a claimant is engaging in substantial gainful activity, she is not disabled; (2) if a claimant does not have a severe impairment, she is not disabled; (3) if the claimant's impairment meets or equals a listed impairment, she is disabled; (4) if the claimant is capable of returning to work she has done in the past, she is not disabled; (5) if the claimant can do other work that exists in significant numbers in the regional or the national economy, she is not disabled. Id. If, at one step, an ALJ makes a dispositive finding, the inquiry ends without proceeding to the next. 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1520; 416.920; Skinner v. Sec'y of Health & Human Servs., 902 F.2d 447, 449-50 (6th Cir. 1990).

Section 404.1520 requires an ALJ to evaluate disability through a five-step sequential process, with the claimant bearing the burden of proving disability.

Omar v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2024-09-19

To determine whether a claimant is disabled, an ALJ conducts a five-step sequential evaluation. See 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520; Smolen v. Chater, 80 F.3d 1273, 1289 (9th Cir. 1996) (citing Bowen v. Yuckert, 482 U.S. 137, 140–42 (1991)). In conducting this evaluation, the ALJ “asks five questions in order until a question is answered in such [a manner] that the claimant is conclusively determined disabled or not.” Id. “The claimant has the burden of proving that she is disabled.” Id.

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

MCTIGHE v. COMMISSIONER OF SOCIAL SECURITY · filed 2024-09-26(a)(4)(iii)

The Commissioner employs a five-step sequential evaluation process for disability claims. See 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520(a)(4). ... At step three, an ALJ considers whether the combination of the claimant’s medically determinable impairments meets or equals the severity of any one of the impairments in the Listing of Impairments. 20 C.F.R. § 404,1520(a)(4)Gii), ... The ALJ did so here. He articulated his assessment of the evidence based on the full medical record, and sufficiently compared Plaintiff's limitations and the impact of his impairments to the levels required by the listings.

At step two of the sequential evaluation, an ALJ must determine whether the claimant has a severe medically determinable impairment that significantly limits basic work activities and remains severe, or is expected to remain severe, for at least 12 continuous months.

Coterill v. Commissioner, Social Security Administration · filed 2024-09-27(a)(4)(ii)

At step two, an ALJ must determine whether a claimant’s medically determinable impairments are severe. To be considered “severe,” an impairment must meet each of the following three criteria. First, the impairment must be medically determinable, meaning that it is supported by objective medical evidence, not just a claimant’s statement of her symptoms or a doctor’s mere diagnosis or opinion. 20 C.F.R. § 404.1521. Second, the impairment must cause a significant limitation in basic work-related activities. 20 C.F.R. § 404.1522. Finally, it must remain severe (or be expected to remain severe) for at least 12 continuous months. 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520(a)(4)(ii) (citing 20 C.F.R. § 404.1509 (the duration requirement)).

Section 404.1520(a)(4)(v) requires an ALJ at step five to consider a claimant’s residual functional capacity, age, education, and work experience in determining whether the claimant can perform other jobs in the national economy.

Shiver v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2024-09-28(a)(4)(v)

As explained earlier, the ALJ’s task at step five is to determine whether a claimant can engage in other occupations in the national economy given her RFC, age, education, and work experience. See 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1520(a)(4)(v), 416.920(a)(4)(v). ... An ALJ must therefore assess a claimant’s education level to decide whether a claimant can engage in other jobs in the national economy. See id. §§ 404.1520(a)(4)(v), 416.920(a)(4)(v).

Section 404.1520 requires administrative law judges to use a five-step analysis to determine whether a person is disabled under Title II.

Jarrell v. SSA · filed 2024-09-30(a)(4)

Administrative Law Judges are tasked with conducting a five-step analysis to determine whether a person is disabled within the meaning of Title II. 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520(a)(4).

Section 404.1520 requires an ALJ at step five to determine whether a claimant can perform jobs existing in significant numbers in the national economy given the claimant's residual functional capacity, age, education, and work experience.

Gonzalez-Rivera v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2024-09-30(a)(4)(v)

Step five requires an ALJ to determine whether a claimant could perform jobs that existed in significant numbers in the national economy given his RFC, age, education, and work experience. 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520(a)(4)(v), 404.1560(c)(2). If the claimant could perform jobs, then he was not disabled. 20 C.F.R. § 404.1566(b). If he could not, then he was disabled. Id.

Section 404.1520(a)(4)(ii) directs the ALJ to assess whether a claimant has a severe impairment or combination of impairments at step two; once any severe impairment is found, the claim proceeds to the next step and the ALJ considers all impairments.

Swick v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2024-10-16(a)(4)(ii)

The Social Security regulations outline a five-step sequential evaluation process that the ALJ must use in determining whether a claimant is disabled: (1) whether the claimant is engaged in substantial gainful activity; (2) if not, whether the claimant has a severe impairment or combination of impairments; (3) if so, whether that impairment, or combination of impairments, meets or equals any of the listings in 20 C.F.R. § 404, Subpart P, Appendix 1; (4) if not, whether the claimant can perform her past relevant work in light of her RFC; and (5) if not, whether, based on the claimant’s age, education, and work experience, she can perform other work found in the national economy. 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520(a)(4)(i)–(v). ... Once the ALJ finds that there is one severe impairment, a claimant clears step two, and the ALJ should consider all impairments (severe and non-severe) in the next step.

Section 404.1520(a)(4)(iv) requires the ALJ to determine at step four whether the claimant can perform past relevant work in light of her residual functional capacity, and section 404.1520(a)(4)(v) places the evaluation of adjustment to other work at step five.

WILLIAMS v. COMMISSIONER OF SOCIAL SECURITY · filed 2024-10-21(a)(4)(iv), (a)(4)(v)

At step four of the five-step sequential process, the ALJ must determine whether the claimant can perform past relevant work, considering her RFC. 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520(a)(4)(iv). ... Said another way, transferability of skills comes into play at the last step of the five-step sequential analysis. 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520(a)(4)(v).

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

Crane v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2024-10-24

The correct legal principle that ALJs must undertake to ascertain a claimant’s status is the sequential five-step inquiry of the Social Security Disability Standard outlined by the Commissioner’s regulations. See 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1520, 416.920.

Section 404.1520(a)(4)(iii) requires a Step Three determination of whether a claimant’s impairment meets or medically equals a listed impairment, with an explained analysis sufficient for judicial review.

Shook v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2024-10-31(a)(4)(iii)

At Step Three, a claimant will be found disabled if her impairment meets or equals one of the listings in the Listing of Impairments. 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520(a)(4)(iii); ... Thus, a claimant who meets or medically equals a listing is deemed conclusively disabled and entitled to benefits. ... When considering whether a claimant’s impairment meets or equals a listed impairment, an ALJ must evaluate the evidence, compare it to the relevant listed impairment, and give an explained conclusion to facilitate meaningful judicial review, without which is it impossible to say that the ALJ’s decision at Step Three is supported by substantial evidence.

Section 404.1520 requires disability claims to be evaluated through five sequential steps, with no further inquiry after a step resolves whether the claimant is disabled.

Tunison v. Commissioner of the Social Security Administration · filed 2024-11-21(a)(4)

To facilitate a uniform and efficient processing of disability claims, regulations promulgated under the Act have reduced the statutory definition of disability to a series of five sequential questions. See, e.g., Heckler v. Campbell, 461 U.S. 458, 460 (1983) (discussing considerations and noting “need for efficiency” in considering disability claims). An examiner must consider the following: (1) whether the claimant is working; (2) whether the claimant has a severe impairment; (3) whether that impairment meets or equals an impairment included in the Listings; (4) whether such impairment prevents claimant from performing PRW; and (5) whether the impairment prevents the claimant from performing specific jobs that exist in significant numbers in the national economy. See 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520. These considerations are sometimes referred to as the “five steps” of the Commissioner’s disability analysis. If a decision regarding disability may be made at any step, no further inquiry is necessary. 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520(a)(4) (providing that if Commissioner can find claimant disabled or not disabled at a step, Commissioner makes determination and does not go on to the next step).

Section 404.1520's sequential process requires the ALJ to proceed from a finding of severe impairments to the step-three listing inquiry, and then to RFC when no impairment meets or equals a listing.

Correa-Vargas v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2024-12-18(a)(4)(ii)-(iii), (d)

In sum, at step two, the ALJ’s conclusion that Plaintiff’s medically determinable impairment of depression did not cause more than a minimal limitation in Plaintiff’s ability to perform basic work-related activities and was thus, non-severe, is supported by substantial evidence. Having determined that Plaintiff suffered from three severe conditions, the ALJ correctly moved on in the evaluation process to determine whether Plaintiff had an impairment or combination of impairments that meets or medically equals the severity of one of the listed impairments in 20 C.F.R. Part 404, Appendix 1 (20 C.F.R. § 404.1520(d), 404.1525 and 404.1526. At this step, the ALJ concluded that Plaintiff did not have an impairment or combination of impairments that met or medically equaled the severity of one of the listed impairments, and correctly proceeded to determine Plaintiff’s RFC.

Section 404.1520(a)(4) requires an administrative law judge to assess residual functional capacity after step three and before deciding steps four and five of the disability evaluation.

LAYTON v. COLVIN · filed 2024-12-19(a)(4)

After the step three listings determination, an ALJ must make an RFC assessment before moving to steps four and five of the disability evaluation. See 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1520(a)(4), 416.920(a)(4); Chandler, 667 F.3d at 361.

Section 404.1520(e) requires an ALJ to use the claimant’s residual functional capacity at the fourth and fifth steps of the disability evaluation.

Knight v. Colvin · filed 2024-12-27(e)

Federal regulations require the ALJ to evaluate a claimant’s disability claim using a five-step sequential evaluation process. 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1520, 416.920. ... The ALJ then uses its residual functional capacity determination at the fourth and fifth steps of the disability assessment. 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520(e); Monroe, 826 F.3d at 179. ... The flaw in the ALJ’s residual functional capacity analysis at step four therefore precludes a finding that the ALJ’s conclusion at step five is supported by substantial evidence.

Section 404.1520 requires disability claims to be evaluated through a five-step sequence, with the Commissioner bearing the burden at step five to show that the claimant can perform a significant number of jobs in the national economy given the claimant's residual functional capacity, age, education, and work experience.

Barlow v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2025-01-13(a)(4)(v), (g)

At the fifth step, the Commissioner has the burden of demonstrating a significant number of jobs exist in the national economy that the claimant can perform, given his or her residual functional capacity, age, education, and past work experience. 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1520(a)(4)(v) and (g), 404.1566(a), 416.920(a)(4)(v) and (g), 416.966(a); Wyatt v. Sec’y of Health & Hum. Servs., 974 F.2d 680, 684 (6th Cir. 1992); Moon v. Sullivan, 923 F.2d 1175, 1181 (6th Cir. 1990); Allen v. Califano, 613 F.2d 139, 145 (6th Cir. 1980).

Section 404.1520 requires an ALJ to use a five-step sequential analysis, including determining at step one whether the claimant engages in substantial gainful activity and at step five whether the claimant can perform other work in the national economy.

Bosley v. Kijakazi · filed 2025-01-24(a)(4)(i), (a)(4)(v)

When determining whether a claimant is disabled, the ALJ must follow a five-step sequential analysis. 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1520, 416.920; ... At step one, the ALJ decides whether the claimant is currently working or “doing substantial gainful activity.” 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520(a)(4)(i). If so, the claimant is not disabled. ... At step five, the ALJ determines whether the claimant’s RFC, age, education, and work experience allow the claimant to perform other work that exists in the national economy. 20 C.F. R. § 404.1520(a)(4)(v); Fraga, 810 F.2d at 1304.

At step two, the disability evaluation considers whether the claimant has a severe impairment, considering the combined effect of all impairments on the ability to perform basic work activities.

(SS) Gausling v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2025-01-30(c)

In determining whether a claimant’s alleged impairment is sufficiently severe to limit the ability to work, the Commissioner must consider the combined effect of all impairments on the ability to function, without regard to whether each impairment alone would be sufficiently severe. ... An impairment, or combination of impairments, can only be found to be non-severe if the evidence establishes a slight abnormality that has no more than a minimal effect on an individual’s ability to work. ... The Court finds that the ALJ did not err at Step 2 in failing to consider impairments which were never alleged to be disabling, and as to which Plaintiff has not met his initial burden of providing evidence that such impairments more than minimally impact his ability to work.

Section 404.1520(a)(4) requires ALJs to determine disability through a five-step sequential evaluation, proceeding through each step until a determination can be reached.

M. v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2025-02-04(a)(4)

ALJs must employ a “five-step sequential evaluation process” to determine whether a claimant is disabled, proceeding through each step until a determination can be reached.

Section 404.1520 requires the ALJ to evaluate disability sequentially by determining whether the claimant is engaged in substantial gainful activity, has a severe impairment, and can perform past relevant work.

Gremillion v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2025-02-28(a)(4)(i), (a)(4)(ii), (a)(4)(iv), (f)

At step one, a claimant must prove that they have not engaged in “substantial gainful activity.” 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520(a)(4)(i). ... At step two, a claimant must prove that they have a severe impairment. 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520(a)(4)(ii). ... The ALJ must also consider whether a claimant’s impairments prevent the claimant from doing their “past relevant work.” 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520(a)(4)(iv). In doing do, the ALJ must “compare [Plaintiff’s] residual functional capacity assessment . . . with the physical and mental demands of [Plaintiff’s] past relevant work.” 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520(f)). “If, based on that comparison, the plaintiff is able to perform [his] past relevant work, the ALJ will find the plaintiff is not disabled within the meaning of the Act.” Rebecca H. v. Comm’r of Soc. Sec., No. 20-CV-1058, 2022 WL 293854, at *4 (N.D.N.Y. Feb. 1, 2022) (citing 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520(f)). ... The ALJ considered Ms. Paulson testimony in conjunction with the information in the DOT and concluded that Plaintiff’s RFC allowed him to perform his past relevant work as a janitor or cleaner. The Court finds this determination to be supported by substantial evidence.

Section 404.1520 sets out a five-step process for evaluating disability claims, and the court held that the ALJ erred by stopping at step two after the evidence showed the claimant's impairments met the de minimis severity threshold.

Worden v. O'Malley · filed 2025-03-10

The Commissioner uses a five-step process, set forth in 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1520 and 416.920, to evaluate disability insurance and SSI disability claims. ... The ALJ’s decision that Plaintiff was not disabled only after completing step two of the sequential analysis was legal error and not supported by substantial evidence. ... There is clearly sufficient evidence in the administrative record for the ALJ to have concluded that Plaintiff’s impairments were more than de minimis as of the date last insured. While the ALJ may have ultimately determined that Plaintiff was not disabled, the ALJ’s failure to complete the five step sequential analysis warrants remand.

Section 404.1520 requires disability claims to be evaluated through a five-step sequence, with past relevant work considered at step four and other national-economy work at step five.

Cancel-Vientos v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2025-03-18

If not, the evaluation proceeds to Step Four, through which the ALJ assesses the claimant’s residual functional capacity and determines whether the impairments prevent the claimant from doing the work she has performed in the past. ... If she cannot perform this work, the fifth and final Step asks whether the claimant can perform other work available in the national economy in view of her residual functional capacity, as well as age, education, and work experience. ... The Medical-Vocational Guideline rules apply at Step Five of the sequential disability analysis outlined above – in other words, they apply to determine whether an individual who cannot perform past relevant work is capable of performing any other work in the national economy. ... Cancel-Vientós confuses the ALJ’s Step-Four decision for a Step Five decision. ... The ALJ determined that she was capable of returning to her previous work as a legal secretary. Whether other jobs exist in the national economy that Cancel-Vientós can perform was not a question that the ALJ reached in her decision.

Section 404.1520 requires an ALJ to determine disability through a five-step sequential analysis.

Stitt v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2025-03-28

An ALJ is required to follow a five-step sequential analysis to make a disability determination: 1. Is the claimant engaged in substantial gainful activity? If so, the claimant is not disabled. 2. Does the claimant have a medically determinable impairment, or a combination of impairments, that is "severe"? If not, the claimant is not disabled. 3. Does the claimant’s impairment meet or equal one of the listed impairments and meet the duration requirement? If so, the claimant is disabled. If not, the ALJ proceeds to the next step. 4. What is the claimant’s residual functional capacity and can the claimant perform past relevant work? If so, the claimant is not disabled. If not, the ALJ proceeds to the next step. 5. Can the claimant do any other work considering the claimant’s residual functional capacity, age, education, and work experience? If so, the claimant is not disabled. If not, the claimant is disabled. 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1520, 416.920.

Section 404.1520(a) requires an ALJ to evaluate disability claims through five sequential steps, including determining at step four whether the claimant can perform past relevant work.

Satterlee v. O'Mailey · filed 2025-04-02(a)

In making this determination, the ALJ follows a five-step evaluation. 20 C.F.R. §§404.1520(a), 416.920(a). The ALJ must sequentially determine whether the claimant: (1) is engaged in substantial gainful activity; (2) has a severe impairment; (3) has a severe impairment that meets or equals a listed impairment; (4) is able to do his or her past relevant work; and (5) is able to do any other work, considering his or her age, education, work experience and residual functional capacity (“RFC”). 20 C.F.R. §§404.1520(a)(4), 416.920(a)(4).

Section 404.1520 requires an ALJ to evaluate disability claims in five steps: substantial gainful activity, severity, listed impairment, past relevant work, and other work in the national economy, with disability determined according to the result at each step.

Emily C. v. Dudek · filed 2025-05-01

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

Section 404.1520 requires an ALJ to use a five-step sequential analysis to determine whether a claimant is disabled, including evaluating work activity, impairment severity, listed-impairment equivalence, residual functional capacity and past work, and other available work.

Jones v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2025-04-28

An ALJ is required to follow a five-step sequential analysis to make a disability determination: ... Under this sequential analysis, the claimant has the burden of proof at steps one through four.

Section 404.1520(c) requires a claimant to have a severe impairment that significantly limits physical or mental ability to perform basic work activities, considering the claimant's age, education, and work experience.

Craig v. SSA · filed 2025-05-13(c)

Social Security regulations interpret “disability” to require the existence of a “severe impairment” – one that “significantly limits [the claimant's] physical or mental ability to do basic work activities” in light of that individual's age, education, and work experience. 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520(c).

At step four, § 404.1520 requires determining whether a claimant can perform past relevant work, and a finding that the claimant can perform it as generally performed precludes disability.

Guerriero v. O'Malley · filed 2025-05-14(a)(4)(iv), (f)

At step four, the Commissioner must determine whether the claimant’s RFC permits the claimant to perform their “past relevant work.” 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520(a)(4)(iv). ... If the claimant can perform their past relevant work, the claimant is not disabled. 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520(f). ... To the extent that Guerriero’s argument is a legal challenge to the ALJ’s decision to use “generally performed” rather than “actually performed” as the RFC reference point, this argument is rejected because it contradicts established law.

At step four, Section 404.1520 provides that a claimant is not disabled if the claimant can still perform past relevant work given the claimant's residual functional capacity.

Malley v. Bisignano · filed 2025-05-15(a)(4)

Under step four of the ALJ analysis, “if the claimant can still perform the claimant’s past relevant work given the claimant’s [RFC], the claimant is not disabled.” 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520(a)(4). ... The Court finds that the ALJ erred at step four of the analysis by failing to develop and explain how Plaintiff was able to perform his past relevant work in light of the VE’s testimony regarding his conclusions and therefore did not base his findings on substantial evidence.

Section 404.1520(a)(4) requires ALJs to evaluate disability claims through a five-step sequence: considering substantial gainful activity, severity, listed impairments, past relevant work, and other work in the national economy.

Joseph v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2025-05-27(a)(4)

The Social Security Administration’s regulations require ALJs to follow a five-step sequence in evaluating disability claims. 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520(a)(4). ... Having reviewed the record, the Court concludes that the ALJ both applied the correct legal standard and reached a conclusion supported by substantial evidence. The ALJ properly applied the five-step process outlined above. See Tr. 17-25. And substantial evidence supported his findings at each step.

At step four, the ALJ must use a more detailed analysis to assess the claimant’s residual functional capacity and account for severe and non-severe impairments, including mild mental limitations.

Forsch v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2025-06-02(e)

Thus, there is no context in the ALJ’s analysis at Step Four that substantiates the statement at Step Two that the RFC reflects Ms. Forsch’s mild, non-severe mental limitations or that the ALJ performed the “more detailed analysis” of those limitations that Step Four requires. ... Accordingly, remand is warranted so the ALJ may properly consider the effect of Ms. Forsch’s severe and non-severe impairments on her RFC.

Section 404.1520 requires an ALJ to evaluate disability through five sequential steps, including determining whether the claimant can perform past relevant work and other work considering the claimant's residual functional capacity.

Bienkowski v. O'Malley · filed 2025-06-12(a)(4)

In making this determination at the administrative level, the ALJ follows a five-step sequential evaluation process. 20 C.F.R. §404.1520(a). Under this process, the ALJ must sequentially determine: (1) whether the claimant is engaged in substantial gainful activity; (2) whether the claimant has a severe impairment; (3) whether the claimant’s impairment meets or equals a listed impairment; (4) whether the claimant is able to do his or her past relevant work; and (5) whether the claimant is able to do any other work, considering his or her age, education, work experience and residual functional capacity (“RFC”). 20 C.F.R. §404.1520(a)(4).

Section 404.1520 requires a five-step sequential disability inquiry and ends the review once a step establishes disability or nondisability.

Brown v. Commissioner, SSA · filed 2025-06-17(a)(4)

A disability determination under the Social Security Act requires a five-step inquiry. “If at any step a finding of disability or nondisability can be made, the SSA will not review the claim further.”

Section 404.1520(c) requires denial at step two when a claimant lacks a severe medically determinable impairment or severe combination of impairments.

Cole v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2025-06-17(c)

At step two of the sequential evaluation process, the ALJ must determine whether the claimant has a severe, medically determinable impairment or a severe combination of impairments. 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520(c). Step two serves as a filter, requiring immediate denial of a claim where no severe impairment is shown.

Section 404.1520 requires the ALJ to use a five-step disability evaluation, including deciding at step three whether impairments meet or equal a listed impairment and at step four whether the claimant can perform past relevant work.

KOCI v. COMMISSIONER OF SOCIAL SECURITY · filed 2025-06-20(a)(4)(iii), (a)(4)(iv), (e), (f)

Regulations promulgated under the Act establish a five-step process for determining whether a claimant is disabled for purposes of SSI and DIB. 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520.5 ... The Court finds ALJ Damille’s step three determination that Plaintiff did not meet any listing in the Impairment List or establish medical equivalence is supported by substantial evidence. ... At step four in the disability determination process, an ALJ must assess the claimant’s RFC and compare it to her past relevant work. 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1520(e), (f); Bowen, 482 U.S. at 141. ... ALJ Damille’s step four RFC determination was therefore supported by substantial evidence and not in error.

Section 404.1520(a)(4)(ii)–(iii) requires an ALJ to determine at Step Two whether the claimant has a severe impairment and at Step Three whether the impairments meet or equal a listed impairment.

Irvin B. v. Bisignano · filed 2025-07-21(a)(4)(ii), (a)(4)(iii)

For claimants aged eighteen and over, the ALJ must follow a five-step process in evaluating a claim of disability. See 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520(a). First, if a claimant is working at a substantial gainful activity, the claimant is not disabled. Id. § 404.1520(a)(4)(i). Second, if a claimant does not have any impairment or combination of impairments that significantly limit physical or mental ability to do basic work activities, then the claimant does not have a severe impairment and is not disabled. Id. § 404.1520(a)(4)(ii). Third, if a claimant’s impairments meet or equal an impairment listed in 20 C.F.R. Part 404, Appendix 1, the claimant is disabled. Id. § 404.1520(a)(4)(iii). Fourth, if a claimant’s impairments do not prevent doing past relevant work, the claimant is not disabled. Id. § 404.1520(a)(4)(iv). Fifth, if a claimant’s impairments (considering RFC, age, education and past work) prevent doing other work that exists in the local or national economy, a finding of disabled is warranted. Id. § 404.1520(a)(4)(v). ... Based on the foregoing, the Court finds no error in the ALJ’s omission of headache/migraines in his Step-Two analysis, no error in the ALJ’s failure to perform a Listing analysis of headaches/migraines at Step Three and no error in the ALJ’s failure to adopt an RFC limitation to accommodate headaches/migraines.

Section 404.1520(a) requires an ALJ to evaluate disability claims sequentially through five steps: substantial gainful activity, severity, listed impairment, past relevant work, and other work considering the claimant’s RFC and vocational factors.

Alexandre v. O'Malley · filed 2025-07-21(a)

In making this determination, the ALJ follows a five-step evaluation. ... The ALJ must sequentially determine whether the claimant: (1) is engaged in substantial gainful activity; (2) has a severe impairment; (3) has a severe impairment that meets or equals a listed impairment; (4) is able to do his or her past relevant work; and (5) is able to do any other work, considering his or her age, education, work experience and residual functional capacity (“RFC”).

Section 404.1520 requires an ALJ at step two to consider a claimant's pain when deciding whether the claimant has a severe impairment.

Ebony Wilson v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2025-07-22(a)(4)(ii), (c)

We agree with Ms. Wilson that the ALJ committed legal error at step two by failing to consider her pain as part of the analysis. See Saunders, 6 F.4th at 3 (citing 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1520(a)(4)(ii), 404.1520(c), 404.1509).

Section 404.1520(a)(4)(i)–(v) establishes a five-step sequential process for evaluating whether a claimant is disabled.

MESSINA v. COMMISSIONER OF SOCIAL SECURITY · filed 2025-07-07(a)(4)(i)–(v)

The Commissioner of the Social Security Administration has promulgated a five-step, sequential analysis for evaluating a claimant’s disability, as outlined in 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1520(a)(4)(i)–(v).

Section 404.1520 requires an ALJ to determine disability through a five-step sequential process.

Munion v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2025-07-07

To make a determination of disability under this definition, an ALJ is required to follow a five-step sequential analysis set out in agency regulations, summarized as follows: 1. If the claimant is doing substantial gainful activity, he is not disabled. 2. If the claimant is not doing substantial gainful activity, his impairment must be severe before he can be found to be disabled. 3. If the claimant is not doing substantial gainful activity, is suffering from a severe impairment that has lasted or is expected to last for a continuous period of at least twelve months, and his impairment meets or equals a listed impairment, the claimant is presumed disabled without further inquiry. 4. If the impairment does not meet or equal a listed impairment, the ALJ must assess the claimant’s residual functional capacity and use it to determine if the claimant’s impairment prevents him from doing past relevant work. If the claimant’s impairment does not prevent him from doing his past relevant work, he is not disabled. 5. If the claimant is unable to perform past relevant work, he is not disabled if, based on his vocational factors and residual functional capacity, he is capable of performing other work that exists in significant numbers in the national economy.

Section 404.1520 requires an ALJ to consider all medically determinable impairments, assess their severity, and evaluate their effects throughout the sequential disability analysis.

Lambert v. Commissioner, Social Security Administration · filed 2025-07-15(a)(4)(i)-(iv)

In this case, the ALJ’s failure to consider Lambert’s sleep apnea was not harmless, as he was required to consider all medically determinable impairments, assess their severity, and evaluate their impact at each step of the disability analysis.

Section 404.1520(a)(4) requires disability claims to be evaluated through five sequential steps, and once a determination is made at one step, evaluation at a later step is unnecessary.

Redman v. Social Security Administration, Commissioner of · filed 2023-04-06(a)(4)

To evaluate an application for disability benefits, the Commissioner uses a five-step sequential analysis. 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1520(a)(4) (disability insurance), 416.920(a)(4) (supplemental security income); Wilson v. Astrue, 602 F.3d 1136, 1139 (10th Cir. 2010). “If a determination can be made at any of the steps that a claimant is or is not disabled, evaluation under a subsequent step is not necessary.” Wilson, 602 F.3d at 1139 (quoting Lax, 489 F.3d at 1084). The claimant bears the burden of proof for the first four steps, but the Commissioner does for the fifth. Hackett v. Barnhart, 395 F.3d 1168, 1171 (10th Cir. 2005). In the first three steps, the Commissioner determines whether the claimant has engaged in substantial gainful activity since the alleged onset of the disability, whether the claimant has any severe impairments, and whether any of those impairments meets or equals the severity of any impairment in the Listing of Impairments found in 20 C.F.R., Pt. 404, Subpt. P, App. 1. 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1520(a)(4)(i)–(iii), 416.920(a)(4)(i)–(iii); Williams v. Bowen, 844 F.2d 748, 750–51 (10th Cir. 1988). The fourth and fifth steps of the analysis depend on the claimant’s residual functional capacity (RFC), which the Commissioner assesses after completing the third analytical step. 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1520(e), 416.920(e). A claimant’s RFC is the most the claimant can do despite limitations. Id. §§ 404.1545(a)(1), 416.945(a)(1). The Commissioner determines the claimant’s RFC based on all relevant evidence in the record. SSR 16-3p, 2017 WL 5180304, at *4–*5 (Oct. 25, 2017). After analyzing the claimant’s RFC, the Commissioner proceeds to the fourth and fifth steps of the analysis. At step four, the Commissioner determines whether the claimant can perform his or her past relevant work in light of his or her RFC. 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1520(a)(4)(iv), 416.920(a)(4)(iv). If so, the claimant is not disabled. Id. At step five, the Commissioner bears the burden to show—in light of the claimant’s RFC, age, education, and work experience—that suitable work “exists in significant numbers in the national economy.” Id. §§ 404.1520(a)(4)(v), 416.920(a)(4)(v), 404.1560(c)(2), 416.960(c)(2).

Section 404.1520 permits an ALJ to end the sequential evaluation at step two when the claimant has no severe impairment, without proceeding to later steps.

Brinker v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2023-04-03(c)

However, 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520 explains that if the ALJ finds the claimant is not disabled at any step in the five-step sequential evaluation process, he will not move on to the next step. 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520(c). The ALJ found that Mr. Brinker did not have any severe impairments at step two, and the regulations require a claimant to have a severe impairment to be found disabled.

Section 404.1520(a)(4)(iii) requires the ALJ to determine whether a claimant’s impairments meet or equal a listed impairment, and § 404.1520(a)(4)(v) requires determining whether the claimant can perform work existing in significant numbers in the national economy.

Miranda v. Kijakazi · filed 2023-04-21(a)(4)(iii), (a)(4)(v)

First, he claims the ALJ erred in determining that none of Miranda’s impairments met or equaled one of the relevant listed impairments. See 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1520(a)(4)(iii), 416.920(a)(4)(iii); see also 20 C.F.R. Part 404, Subpt. P, App’x 1. Second, he says the ALJ also erred by finding that Miranda could have performed work available in significant numbers in the national economy. See 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1520(a)(4)(v); 416.920(a)(4)(V). ... We disagree: Substantial evidence supported each of these findings. The record demonstrates that the ALJ appropriately considered Miranda’s treatment history and other relevant evidence in concluding that he did not satisfy all the relevant criteria. ... Likewise, the ALJ properly relied upon the vocational expert’s testimony that someone of Miranda’s age, education, past work experience, and residual functional capacity could perform jobs existing in sufficient numbers in the economy.

Section 404.1520(a) requires disability claims to proceed through the sequential evaluation in order, so a step-three finding does not eliminate the preceding step-one inquiry.

Mason v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2022-08-08(a)

The social security regulations set forth a five-step sequential process for evaluating disability. See 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1520(a-f), 416.920(a-f). ... Because the determination of SGA is a step-one determination, at least for purposes of this appeal, Plaintiff’s assertion that the ALJ should have ended her analysis at step three lacks merit.

Section 404.1520 requires a five-step disability evaluation, considering substantial gainful activity, severity, listed impairments, past work, and other work in sequence.

Dalton v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2022-08-08

The five-step process is 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; the [Commissioner] presumes that a claimant who is afflicted with a “listed” impairment is unable to perform substantial gainful activity. 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.

Section 404.1520 establishes a five-step disability evaluation and requires denial at step two when the claimant has no severe impairment.

Hart v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2022-03-01(a)(4)(i)-(v)

When a claimant alleges a disability, Social Security regulations provide a five-step inquiry to evaluate whether the claimant is entitled to benefits. 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1520(a)(4), 416.920(a)(4). Step Two asks whether the claimant has an impairment or combination of impairments that are severe. If not, the claimant is not disabled, and the claim is denied; if yes, the inquiry proceeds to step three. 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1520(a)(4)(i)-(v), 416.920(a)(4)(i)-(v); see also Scheck v. Barnhart, 357 F.3d 697, 699-700 (7th Cir. 2004).

At step two, the ALJ must assess identified impairments for medical determinability and severity; failing to address them can require remand.

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

Turning to the facts of this case, and considering the caselaw discussed above, the ALJ’s failure to make any finding at step two about the conditions of bipolar ... disorder, migraines, and hip osteoarthritis require remand.

At step two, the ALJ must consider all medically determinable impairments; failing to consider them is legal error when it may affect the disability determination.

Leon v. Kijakazi · filed 2024-02-26(a)(4)(ii)

Here, the ALJ failed to mention, let alone analyze, Plaintiff’s HCM, asthma, and hypertension at step two. See AR at 25. This omission constitutes a legal error that is not harmless.

At step two, the ALJ must consider evidence of a claimant’s potential mental impairments.

Thompson v. Commissioner, Social Security Administration · filed 2019-12-05(a)(4)(ii)

In sum, it was reversible error for the ALJ not to have considered Plaintiff’s potential mental impairments at step two.

At step two, an ALJ must address significant evidence of a medically determinable impairment.

Shiegel v. Saul · filed 2022-07-01(c)

The Court finds that significant probative evidence exists that Plaintiff had a medically determinable impairment of PTSD that the ALJ failed to address at step two of the disability analysis.

Section 404.1520(a) requires disability claims to be evaluated through a five-step sequential analysis, including substantial gainful activity, severity, the impairment listings, past relevant work, and other work in the national economy.

BRUMFIELD v. KIJAKAZI · filed 2022-01-06(a)

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

At step two of the five-step disability analysis, finding any severe impairment permits the claim to proceed to the remaining steps; an error in omitting additional severe impairments is harmless if the claimant already has a severe impairment.

Medina v. Social Security Administration · filed 2016-01-06(a)(4)

Thus, even if Medina’s other conditions should have been categorized as severe impairments, any error was harmless because the ALJ determined that her obesity and “thyroid cancer status post total thyroidectomy” were severe impairments, allowing him to move onto step three of the test.

Section 404.1520 requires the Commissioner to use a five-step sequential evaluation of disability, and the analysis must continue beyond step two when the evidence does not clearly establish that the claim is groundless.

Miller v. Colvin · filed 2016-03-31(a)(4)

The Commissioner follows a five-step sequential evaluation process to assess whether a claimant is disabled. 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520(a)(4). ... The ALJ should have continued the sequential analysis beyond step two because there was not substantial evidence to'show that [Plaintiffs] claim was ‘groundless.’ ... As such, the ALJ’s' dismissal at Step Two was in error, and such error was not harmless.

Section 404.1520’s five-step sequential evaluation places the step-four burden on the claimant to show inability to perform past relevant work and shifts the step-five burden to the Commissioner to show that other gainful work is available in the national economy.

Heagney-O'Hara v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2016-04-21

At step four, a claimant bears the burden of showing that she cannot perform her past relevant work. ... At step five, the burden shifts to the Commissioner to establish that the claimant can perform other gainful work available in the national economy. ... Accordingly, we find no error with the ALJ’s analysis at either step four or step five of the sequential evaluation process.

Section 404.1520 establishes a five-step sequential process for deciding disability claims: substantial gainful activity, severe impairment, listed impairments, residual functional capacity and past relevant work, and other work.

Vine v. Colvin · filed 2016-04-13(b) (c) (d) (e) (g)

Step one assesses whether the claimant is presently engaged in “substantial gainful activity.” 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520(b). Step two assesses whether the claimant has a “severe impairment,” which is defined as an impairment or combination of impairments that “significantly limits [his or her] physical or mental ability to do basic work activities.” 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520(c). Step three assesses whether the claimant’s impairments) “meets or equals” one of the “listed impairments” in 20 C.F.R. Part 404, Subpart P, Appendix 1. 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520(d). Step four assesses the claimant’s RFC, which is a measure of what activities the claimant is able to accomplish despite his or her impairments), and whether claimant can perform any of his or her “past relevant work.” 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520(e). Finally, step five assesses whether the claimant can perform any other work taking into account the measured RFC. 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520(g).

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

Ward v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2016-08-01(a)(4)

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

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

Chambers v. SSA · filed 2016-10-25

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

The regulation requires the Commissioner to use a five-step sequential process to determine whether a claimant is disabled.

Ingrassia v. Colvin · filed 2017-03-06(a)(4)(i)-(v)

In determining whether a claimant is disabled, the Commissioner is required to apply the five-step sequential process set forth in 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520.

The regulation requires a five-step disability evaluation: assess impairment severity at step two and, at step three, determine whether the claimant’s condition as a whole meets or medically equals a listed impairment, considering impairments in combination.

Vangile v. Commissioner, Social Security Administration · filed 2017-07-13(a)(4), (a)(4)(ii), (a)(4)(iii)

At the second step of the evaluation process, the ALJ must consider the medical severity of the claimant’s impairments. 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520(a)(4)(ii). If the ALJ finds a claimant does not have a “severe” impairment or combination of impairments, she should conclude the claimant does not have a disability. Id. ... At step three, the ALJ determines whether the claimant’s “medical condition taken as a whole” qualifies as or is medically equivalent to one of the listed disabilities. Id.; see 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520(a)(4)(iii). The ALJ must consider the claimant’s impairments in combination and determine whether that combination renders the claimant disabled.

Section 404.1520(a)(4)(ii) requires the ALJ to assess impairment severity, and § 404.1520(a)(4)(iv) requires the ALJ to determine whether the claimant can perform past relevant work based on residual functional capacity.

Womble v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2017-08-30(a)(4)(ii), (a)(4)(iv)

At step two, the ALJ must consider the severity of the claimant’s impairments. 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520(a)(4)(ii). An impairment is severe if it “significantly limits [a claimant’s] physical or mental ability to do basic work activities.” Id. § 404.1520(c). At step four, the ALJ considers whether the claimant can do her past relevant work based on the ALJ’s assessment of her residual functional capacity. 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520(a)(4)(iv). ... Contrary to Womble’s contentions, we interpret the ALJ’s statements to mean that she found Womble’s IBS not to be a severe impairment, and not that the impairment was not medically determinable. ... We are also unpersuaded by Womble’s argument that the ALJ failed to consider her IBS and hand tremors in the residual functional capacity determination.

Section 404.1520(a)(4) requires the Commissioner to evaluate disability claims through a five-step process, beginning by determining whether the claimant is engaged in substantial gainful activity.

Trancynger v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2017-09-05(a)(4)

Regulations issued pursuant to the Social-Security Act set forth a five-step process that the Commissioner must use in evaluating a disability claim. See.20 C.F.R. § 404.1520(a)(4); ... First, the Commissioner must determine whether the claimant is currently engaged in any “substantial gainful activity.” 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520(a)(4)(I).

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

Crandlemere v. SSA · filed 2017-09-15

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

Section 404.1520(a)(4) requires the Commissioner to use a five-step sequential analysis and stop reviewing the claim once disability or nondisability is established.

Sutherland v. Berryhill · filed 2017-09-22(a)(4)

In determining whether a person is disabled, the Commissioner is required to perform a five-step sequential analysis. See 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1520, 416.920; Plummer v. Apfel, 186 F.3d 422, 427-28 (3d Cir. 1999). If a finding of disability oj nondisa-bility can be made at- any point in the sequential process, the Commissioner will not review the claim further. See 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1520(a)(4), 416.920(a)(4).

Section 404.1520(a)(4) requires the Commissioner to use a five-step sequential analysis and stop reviewing the claim once disability or nondisability is established.

Rickabaugh v. Berryhill · filed 2017-09-22(a)(4)

In determining whether a person is disabled, the Commissioner is .required to perform a five-step sequential analysis. See 20 C.F.R, §§ 404.1520, 416.920; Plummer v. Apfel, 186 F.3d 422, 427-28 (3d Cir. 1999). If a finding of disability or nondisa-bility can be made at any point in the sequential process, the Commissioner will not review the claim further. See 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1520(a)(4), 416.920(a)(4).

Section 404.1520 requires the Commissioner to evaluate disability claims through a five-step sequential process, including whether the claimant can perform past relevant work and, if not, adjust to other available work.

Gloria v. Berryhill · filed 2017-09-27(a)(4)

In determining whether a person is disabled, the Commissioner is required to perform a five-step sequential analysis. ... At step four, the Commissioner determines whether the claimant retains the RFC to perform his past relevant work. ... If the claimant is unable to return to her past relevant work, step five requires the Commissioner to determine whether the claimant’s impairments preclude her from adjusting to any other available work.

Section 404.1520(a)(4)(i)-(v) requires an ALJ to use a five-step sequential process for deciding disability claims, beginning with work activity and severity and ending with whether the claimant can perform other work in the national economy.

Brown v. Commissioner Social Security Administration · filed 2017-09-29(a)(4)(i)-(v)

The five-step process for assessing a claim for disability insurance benefits is spelled out in 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520(a)(4)(i)-(v). At steps one and two, the ALJ determines whether the claimant (1) is currently gainfully employed and (2) has a severe impairment, i.e., an impairment that significantly limits the claimant’s physical or mental ability to perform basic work activities. The claimant bears the burden of proof with respect to those initial steps. If the claimant is employed or does not have a severe impairment, he is not disabled and the analysis ends. See Monroe v. Colvin, 826 F.3d 176, 179 (4th Cir. 2016). ... After determining the claimant’s RFC, the ALJ proceeds to step four, “where the burden rests with the claimant to show that he is not able to perform his past work.” See Monroe, 826 F.3d at 180. If the claimant succeeds at step four, the ALJ finishes at step five, where the burden shifts to the Commissioner. In order to withhold disability insurance benefits, the Commissioner must prove, “by a preponderance of the evidence, that the claimant can perform other work that exists in significant numbers in the national economy, considering the claimant’s [RFC], age, education, and work experience.” Id. (internal quotation marks omitted). If the Commissioner satisfies that burden, the claimant is not disabled and his claim for benefits must be denied.

Section 404.1520(a)(4) requires a five-step sequential evaluation of disability claims, and subsection (v) directs consideration of age, education, and work experience with residual functional capacity only at the final step.

Laird v. Social Security Administration Commissioner · filed 2017-11-09(a)(4), (a)(4)(v)

The Commissioner’s regulations require her to apply a five-step sequential evaluation process to each claim for disability benefits: (1) whether the claimant has engaged in substantial gainful activity since filing his claim; (2) whether the claimant has a severe physical and/or mental impairment or combination of impairments; (3) whether the impairment(s) meet or equal an impairment in the listings; (4) whether the impairment(s) prevent the claimant from doing past relevant work; and, (5) whether the claimant is able to perform other work in the national economy given his age, education, and experience. See 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520(a)(4). Only if the final stage is reached does the fact finder consider the Plaintiff’s age, education, and work experience in light of his RFC. See McCoy v. Schweiker, 683 F.2d 1138, 1141-42 (8th Cir. 1982), abrogated on other grounds by Higgins v. Apfel, 222 F.3d 504, 505 (8th Cir. 2000); 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520(a)(4)(v).

Section 404.1520 requires disability claims to be evaluated through five sequential steps, ending with whether the claimant can perform other work in the national economy considering her age, education, and experience.

Jones v. Social Security Administration Commissioner · filed 2018-01-22

The Commissioner’s regulations require her to apply a five-step sequential evaluation process to each claim for disability benefits: (1) whether the claimant has engaged in substantial gainful activity since filing her claim; (2) whether the claimant has a severe physical and/or mental impairment or combination of impairments; (3) whether the impairment(s) meet or equal an impairment in the listings; (4) whether the impairment(s) prevent the claimant from doing past relevant work; and, (5) whether the claimant is able to perform other work in the national economy given her age, education, and experience. See 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1520, 416.920.

Section 404.1520 requires a five-step sequential evaluation of disability claims, including severity, listings, past relevant work, and other work.

Duncan v. Social Security Administration Commissioner · filed 2018-01-31

The Commissioner’s regulations require her to apply a five-step sequential evaluation process to each claim for disability benefits: (1) whether the claimant has engaged in substantial gainful activity since filing his claim; (2) whether the claimant has a severe physical and/or mental impairment or combination of impairments; (3) whether the impairment(s) meet or equal an impairment in the listings; (4) whether the impairment(s) prevent the claimant from doing past relevant work; and, (5) whether the claimant is able to perform other work in the national economy given his age, education, and experience. See 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1520, 416.920.

Section 404.1520(a) requires the Commissioner to determine disability through a five-step sequential evaluation process.

Orrell v. Social Security Administration Commissioner · filed 2018-01-11(a)

To determine whether the adult claimant suffers from a disability, the Commissioner uses the familiar five-step sequential evaluation. He determines: (1) whether the claimant is presently engaged in a “substantial gainful activity”; (2) whether the claimant has a severe impairment that significantly limits the claimant’s physical or mental ability to perform basic work activities; (3) whether the claimant has an impairment that meets or equals a presumptively disabling impairment listed in the regulations (if so, the claimant is disabled without regard to age, education, and work experience); (4) whether the claimant has the Residual Functional Capacity (RFC) to perform his or her past relevant work; and (5) if the claimant cannot perform the past work, the burden shifts to the Commissioner to prove that there are other jobs in the national economy that the claimant can perform. See Cox, 160 F.3d at 1206; 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1520(a)-(f).

Section 404.1520 requires a five-step evaluation of disability claims, considering current work, severity, listed impairments, past relevant work, and other work.

Barrett v. Berryhill · filed 2018-02-14

The Social Security Regulations establish a five-step procedure for determining whether a claimant is entitled to social security benefits. ... The first step of this process requires the [Commissioner] to determine whether the claimant is presently employed. If the claimant is not employed, the [Commissioner] then determines whether the claimant has a "severe impairment" that limits her capacity to work. If the claimant has such an impairment, the [Commissioner] next considers whether the claimant has an impairment listed in Appendix 1 of the regulations. When the claimant has such an impairment, the [Commissioner] will find the claimant disabled. However, if the claimant does not have a listed impairment, the [Commissioner] must determine, under the fourth step, whether the claimant possesses the residual function capacity to perform her past relevant work. Finally, if the claimant is unable to perform her past relevant work, the [Commissioner] determines whether the claimant is capable of performing any other work.

Section 404.1520 requires an ALJ to evaluate disability through five sequential steps, including substantial gainful activity, impairment severity, listed impairments, past work, and other available work.

Drew v. Colvin · filed 2018-02-14(a)(4)(i)-(v)

To determine whether an individual is disabled, the ALJ determines whether 1) the claimant is engaged in “substantial gainful activity”, 2) the claimant has a severe physical or mental impairment, 3) that impairment is equivalent to an impairment enumerated in the regulations, 4) the claimant’s RFC meets the requirements of his previous work and 5) there are jobs that would be appropriate for the claimant given her RFC, age, education and work experience. 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1520(a)(4)(i)-(v).

Section 404.1520(a)(4) requires a five-step sequential evaluation to determine whether an individual is disabled, including evaluation at steps three and four.

Atchley v. Berryhill · filed 2018-02-28(a)(4)

On remand, the ALJ is obligated to consider and weigh the opinions of Ms. Twedt and Ms. Kautzman at step three. In addition, these opinions must be weighed in establishing Mr. Atchley’s RFC at step four. The court trusts on remand the Commissioner will direct an ALJ to conduct a proceeding consistent with the requirements of the five-step sequential evaluation process for determining whether an individual is disabled. 20 CFR § 404.1520(a)(4).

Section 404.1520 requires a mandatory five-step sequential evaluation of disability claims, and later steps are unnecessary when an earlier step resolves the claim.

Webb v. Berryhill · filed 2018-03-05(b), (c), (d), and (e)

The ALJ applies a five-step procedure to decide whether an applicant is disabled. This sequential analysis is mandatory for all SSI and SSD/DIB applications. ... When a determination that an applicant is or is not disabled can be made at any step, evaluation under a subsequent step is unnecessary.

Section 404.1520 requires disability to be evaluated through five sequential steps and directs a finding of not disabled when a claimant can perform past relevant work or adjust to other work.

Middleton v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2018-03-13(a)(4), (f), (g)

SSA determines whether a person is disabled by a five-step sequential evaluation process: (i) At the first step, we consider your work activity, if any. If you are doing substantial gainful activity, we will find that you are not disabled[.] (ii) At the second step, we consider the medical severity of your impairment(s). If you do not have a severe medically determinable physical or mental impairment that meets the duration requirement in [20 C.F.R.] § 404.1509, or a combination of impairments that is severe and meets the duration requirement, we will find that you are not disabled[.] (iii) At the third step, we also consider the medical severity of your impairment(s). If you have an impairment(s) that meets or equals one of our listings in appendix 1 of this subpart and meets the duration requirement, we will find that you are disabled[.] (iv) At the fourth step, we consider our assessment of your residual functional capacity and your past relevant work. If you can still do your past relevant work, we will find that you are not disabled[.] (v) At the fifth and last step, we consider our assessment of your residual functional capacity and your age, education, and work experience to see if you can make an adjustment to other work. If you can make an adjustment to other work, we will find that you are not disabled. If you cannot make an adjustment to other work, we will find that you are disabled[.] 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520(a)(4).

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

Garcia v. Social Security Administration Commissioner · filed 2018-03-29

The Commissioner’s regulations require her to apply a five-step sequential evaluation process to each claim for disability benefits: (1) whether the claimant has engaged in substantial gainful activity since filing his claim; (2) whether the claimant has a severe physical and/or mental impairment or combination of impairments; (3) whether the impairment(s) meet or equal an impairment in the listings; (4) whether the impairment(s) prevent the claimant from doing past relevant work; and, (5) whether the claimant is able to perform other work in the national economy given his age, education, and experience. See 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1520, 416.920.

Section 404.1520 requires disability claims to proceed through a five-step sequence, including a step-three determination whether the claimant's impairment meets or equals a listed impairment; the court held that the ALJ's discussion elsewhere in the decision could adequately support that step-three determination.

Doty v. Berryhill · filed 2018-03-30(d)

The Social Security Regulations establish a five-step sequential evaluation for the adjudication of disability claims. 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1520, 416.920(a)(4). The first step is whether a claimant is currently engaged in gainful employment. §§ 404.1520(b), 416.920(a)(4)(i). If the answer is no, the next step is whether the claimant suffers a severe impairment. §§ 404.1520(c), 416.920(a)(4)(ii). The third step is whether the claimant’s impairment meets or equals any of the impairments listed in Appendix 1 to Subpart P of the Administrative Regulations. §§ 404.1520(d), 416.920(a)(4)(iii). ... This discussion, while not located in the ALJ’s step three analysis, clearly explains why the ALJ found that Doty did not meet Listing 1.04. Thus, the ALJ’s decision is supported by substantial evidence, and remand is unnecessary.

Section 404.1520 requires disability claims to be decided through a five-step sequential evaluation, including consideration of past relevant work at step four and adjustment to other work at step five.

Middleton v. Comm'r of Soc. Sec. · filed 2018-03-13(a)(4), (f), and (g)

SSA determines whether a person is disabled by a five-step sequential evaluation process: ... (v) At the fifth and last step, we consider our assessment of your residual functional capacity and your age, education, and work experience to see if you can make an adjustment to other work. If you can make an adjustment to other work, we will find that you are not disabled. If you cannot make an adjustment to other work, we will find that you are disabled[.] ... If a claimant can make an adjustment to other work, SSA will find that she is not disabled.

Section 404.1520 establishes a five-step sequential process for disability determinations, including a step-four determination of whether the claimant can perform past relevant work.

Ruiz v. Berryhill · filed 2018-05-09

The ALJ properly evaluated Appellant’s ability to perform her past relevant work at step four of the five-step sequential process for disability determinations. See 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520. At step four, the ALJ determines whether a claimant’s impairment prevents her from doing past relevant work.

Under the sequential evaluation, a claimant is disabled at step three if the impairment meets or equals a listed impairment; otherwise, at step four the claimant must show that the impairment prevents past relevant work.

Moore v. Colvin · filed 2018-07-03(d), (e)

The third step requires “the claimant” to show that she “suffers from an impairment that meets the duration requirement and meets or equals an impairment listed in . . . Appendix 1[.]” ... Had the ALJ found the opposite, Plaintiff would have been “deemed disabled and the inquiry” would have ended. Butler, 353 F.3d at 997 (citing 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1520(d), 416.920(d)); (see AR 19) (indicating same)).... Because Plaintiff failed to carry her burden “on the first four steps,” the ALJ correctly found her not disabled. Butler, 353 F.3d at 997; see id. (“If [as here] the claimant does not satisfy step three, the inquiry proceeds to the fourth step, which requires her to show that she suffers an impairment that renders her incapable of performing ‘past relevant work.’”) (citing 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1520(e), 416.920(e)).