20 C.F.R. § 404.1529

Objective evidence may contradict symptom testimony, but § 404.1529(c)(2) does not allow rejection merely because the testimony lacks affirmative objective substantiation.

Ayla C.R. v. Commissioner of Social Security Administration · filed 2026-01-28(c)(2)

It is proper for the ALJ to consider the objective medical evidence in making a credibility determination. 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1529(c)(2), 416.929(c)(2). However, “we require the ALJ to specify which testimony she finds not credible, and then provide clear and convincing reasons, supported by evidence in the record, to support that credibility determination.” Brown-Hunter v. Colvin, 806 F.3d 487, 489 (9th Cir. 2015). The ALJ may discredit subjective testimony “[w]hen objective medical evidence in the record is inconsistent with the claimant’s subjective testimony.” Smartt v. Kijakazi, 53 F.4th 489, 498 (9th Cir. 2022) (emphasis in original). In particular, an ALJ may not make a negative credibility finding “solely because” the claimant’s symptom testimony “is not substantiated affirmatively by objective medical evidence,” as opposed to contradicted by it. Robbins v. Soc. Sec. Admin., 466 F.3d 880, 883 (9th Cir. 2006).

Section 404.1529(c) permits discounting symptom complaints inconsistent with objective medical evidence only when the adjudicator explains why the findings conflict with the complaints; lack of corroboration alone is insufficient.

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

While an ALJ may not “reject a claimant’s subjective complaints based solely on lack of medical evidence to fully corroborate the alleged severity of pain,” the ALJ may discount subjective complaints that are inconsistent with the objective medical evidence, so long as the ALJ explains why the objective medical findings are inconsistent with the claimant’s complaints.

Section 404.1529(c)(4) requires consideration of conflicts between symptom statements and other evidence but does not require lengthy discussion of every conflict or every choice to credit other evidence.

Wills · filed 2026-02-24(c)(4)

E.W. correctly notes that 20 C.F.R. § 404.1529(c)(4) expressly requires the ALJ to consider the claimant’s statements about his symptoms and whether there are any conflicts with other evidence. However, the regulation does not impose a requirement that the ALJ discuss and explain at length every conflict between the objective medical evidence and the claimant’s alleged symptoms, nor does it require the ALJ to explain why he chose to credit certain evidence over the claimant’s statements.

An ALJ must evaluate all symptom evidence and specifically explain how pain affects work functions; a broad acknowledgment of pain does not justify omitting a supported sitting limitation.

Feliciano v. Kijakazi · filed 2023-07-14(c)(3)–(4)

The ALJ’s broad acknowledgement of Plaintiff’s pain does not suffice; the ALJ was obligated to consider the effects of Plaintiff’s pain on his ability to perform work functions such as sitting.

Section 404.1529(a) requires an ALJ determining RFC to account for the supported effects of a claimant's symptoms on the ability to work.

Barajas v. O'Malley · filed 2024-04-04(a)

An ALJ is required to consider the effects of a claimant’s symptoms on her ability to work. 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1529(a), 416.929(a).

Section 404.1529(c)(3)(iv)–(v) permits an ALJ to consider the treatment modalities used and their effectiveness in relieving pain and other symptoms.

Ridinger v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2023-11-06(c)(3)(iv)–(v)

In addition to considering Plaintiff’s treatment notes and other objective evidence showing largely normal findings, the ALJ considered Plaintiff’s treatment modalities. See 20 C.F.R. § 404.1529(c)(3)(iv)-(v) (adjudicator properly considers the treatment modalities utilized, and the effectiveness of treatment to relieve pain and other symptoms).

Sections 404.1529(c)(3)(iv)–(v) make medication effectiveness and other treatment relevant to symptom evaluation, and documented improvement with therapy and medication may support discounting more extreme alleged limitations.

Vandusen v. Commissioner Social Security Administration · filed 2023-11-14(c)(3)(iv)–(v)

Relevant factors for the ALJ to consider when evaluating symptom testimony include “[t]he type, dosage, effectiveness, and side effects of any medication” the plaintiff takes to alleviate symptoms and “[t]reatment, other than medication” used to relieve symptoms. 20 C.F.R. § 404.1529(c)(3)(iv)-(v). “[E]vidence of medical treatment successfully relieving symptoms can undermine a claim of disability.” Wellington v. Berryhill, 878 F.3d 867, 876 (9th Cir. 2017).

Sections 404.1529(c)(3)(iv)–(v) permit treatment and medication response to inform symptom severity when considered with the whole record.

Williams v. O'Malley · filed 2024-03-28(c)(3)(iv)–(v)

The regulations allow the ALJ to consider Plaintiff’s level of treatment and use of medication in evaluating her subjective complaints, which the ALJ appropriately did so here. See 20 C.F.R. § 404.1529(c)(3)(iv)-(v) (ALJ may consider medication and treatment).

Sections 404.1529(c)(3)(iv)–(v) permit discounting alleged severity that is disproportionate to treatment received.

Boylan v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2024-08-06(c)(3)(iv)–(v)

An ALJ may discount allegations disproportionate with the level of treatment received. 20 C.F.R. § 404.1529(c)(3)(iv)–(v); Smartt, 53 F.4th at 500.

Section 404.1529(c)(3) permits an ALJ to discount allegations of disabling symptoms based on inconsistent medical evidence, improvement with treatment, and minimal treatment.

Sharp v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2024-09-04(c)(3)

The Ninth Circuit has recognized that inconsistent medical evidence, improvement with treatment, and minimal treatment are valid reasons to discount claims of disabling limitations.

Section 404.1529(c)(3) allows an ALJ to consider a claimant’s course of treatment and improvement when assessing reported symptoms.

Kobernic · filed 2025-10-14(c)(3)

A claimant’s course of treatment, including whether symptoms improved with treatment, is a relevant factor for the ALJ to consider when assessing the claimant’s symptom reports.

Subsection 404.1529(c)(3) requires consideration of all symptom evidence, and an ALJ cannot rely solely on function reports without separately addressing materially broader hearing testimony and explaining any decision to discount it.

Bucaanan · filed 2026-03-05(c)(3)

In evaluating the intensity and persistence of a claimant’s symptoms, such as pain, and determining the extent to which a claimant’s symptoms limit their capacity to work, the ALJ must consider all of the evidence presented with regard to the following factors: 1. the claimant’s daily activities; 2. the duration, frequency and intensity of the pain; 3. precipitating and aggravating factors; 4. dosage, effectiveness and side effects of medication; 5. functional restrictions. Polaski v. Heckler, 739 F.2d 1320, 1322 (8th Cir. 1984); see also 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1529(c)(3) & 416.929(c)(3). ... Thus, the ALJ was required to explicitly determine whether Plaintiff’s hearing testimony was credible. The ALJ failed to do so.

Section 404.1529(a) requires an ALJ to consider a claimant's statements and reports when evaluating disability.

Francis v. SSA · filed 2023-12-05(a)

Disability determinations often hinge on the claimant’s credibility. The ALJ must consider statements or reports from the claimant. 20 C.F.R. § 404.1529(a).

Section 404.1529(a) requires an ALJ to consider symptom testimony, including statements about pain and workplace limitations.

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

An ALJ must consider a claimant’s symptom testimony, including statements regarding pain and workplace limitations. See 20 CFR §§ 404.1529(a), 416.929(a).

Section 404.1529(a) requires consideration of claimant statements about symptoms, pain, daily activities, and ability to work.

Sprague v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2024-02-21(a)

An ALJ must consider a claimant’s statements about their symptoms, including pain, and how these symptoms affect the claimant’s activities of daily living and ability to work. 20 C.F.R. § 404.1529(a).

Section 404.1529(c)(4) does not compel an ALJ to accept a claimant's testimony without question when the ALJ evaluates it as part of the entire record.

MCDONALD v. KIJAKAZI · filed 2024-02-29(c)(4)

Further, although he was not compelled to accept Plaintiff’s testimony without question, see 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1529(c)(4), 416.929(c)(4); Chandler, 667 F.3d at 363, he considered such testimony in his analysis. His findings are therefore more than supported by substantial evidence.

Section 404.1529 requires an ALJ to evaluate subjective symptoms against objective medical and other evidence.

Cortez v. Social Security · filed 2024-03-07

In determining a claimant’s RFC, the ALJ must consider all the symptoms, including pain, and the extent to which the symptoms can reasonably be accepted as consistent with the objective medical evidence and other evidence. 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1529 and 416.929; SSRs 96-4p, 96-7p.

Section 404.1529(a) requires consideration of claimant statements about how symptoms affect daily life and ability to work.

Resendez v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2024-03-08(a)

The ALJ is also reminded that, when determining a claimant’s subjective symptoms, the ALJ must consider a claimant’s statements about his symptoms, such as pain, and how the symptoms affect his daily life and ability to work. See 20 C.F.R. § 404.1529(a); SSR 16-3p, 2016 SSR LEXIS 4, 2017 WL 5180304 (Oct. 25, 2017).

Section 404.1529(a) requires careful consideration of a claimant’s statements about symptoms but does not require the ALJ to credit those statements.

HENRY v. KING · filed 2025-07-15(a)

However, “[a]lthough ‘any statements of the individual concerning [his] symptoms must be carefully considered,’ the ALJ is not required to credit them,” and her findings in this regard “are to be accorded great weight and deference” since she is the one who observes the claimant at the hearing. Chandler v. Comm’r of Soc. Sec., 667 F.3d 356, 363 (3d Cir. 2011) (citing SSR 96–7p and 20 C.F.R. § 404.1529(a)); Irelan v. Barnhart, 243 F. Supp. 2d 268, 284 (E.D. Pa. 2003) (citation and internal quotations omitted).

Section 404.1529(a) requires consideration of a claimant’s statements about subjective symptoms but does not require an ALJ to cite specific hearing testimony when the decision’s summary and analysis show those statements were considered.

Nicki J. v. Bisignano · filed 2026-03-09(a)

Second, even if the ALJ only referenced Plaintiff’s function reports, error did not occur because there is no requirement the ALJ must reference specific hearing testimony in his opinion. ... This statement, combined with the summary of Plaintiff’s symptoms, is sufficient to show the ALJ considered Plaintiff’s subjective statements.

Section 404.1529(a) requires an ALJ to consider a claimant’s statements about symptoms but does not require the ALJ to credit them.

MATTIS v. SAUL · filed 2020-06-18(a)

Rather, an ALJ must consider the statements of a claimant concerning his symptoms, but the ALJ is not required to credit them.

Section 404.1529(a) allows an ALJ to consider a claimant’s own statements as evidence about her symptoms.

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

Under the regulations, the ALJ properly considered plaintiffs opinion regarding her diabetes. See 20 C.F.R. § 404.1529(a) (describing “other evidence” to be considered, including “statements or reports” from claimant).

Section 404.1529(c)(3) requires consideration of all pertinent symptom factors; an unexplained reference to daily activities alone does not satisfy the regulation without identifying the activities, explaining the inconsistency, and considering treatment levels and aggravating factors.

Clarke v. Acting Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2023-07-19(c)(3)

The ALJ failed to do this. ... But what daily activities, and why were they inconsistent? And what about the other analysis the Appeals Council required and the regulatory scheme requires of an ALJ: the levels of treatment and aggravating factors reported by Clarke? ... A cursory unexplained reference to “daily activities,” bereft of any citation to any record citation, falls far short of what the Appeals Council directed or the regulations—and specifically 20 C.F.R. § 404.1529—demand.

Section 404.1529(c)'s daily-activities factor requires the ALJ to identify which activities contradict which symptom testimony and to consider the activities' actual scope and frequency.

Blount v. Kijakazi · filed 2023-07-27(c)(3)(i)

The ALJ did not identify the specific subjective symptom testimony that these activities undermine nor explain how the ability to perform the activities contradict the specific testimony. This constitutes legal error. ... In summary, there is insufficient evidence in the record to establish the scope of Plaintiff’s daily activities, the ALJ failed to identify which activities undercut which subjective symptom testimony, and there is not substantial evidence supporting the ALJ’s conclusion.

Section 404.1529(c)(3)(i) permits daily activities to undermine specific symptom allegations when the adjudicator explains the contradiction and also considers objective evidence.

Banks v. Saul · filed 2023-08-24(c)(3)(i)

Although Plaintiff testified that he could not feel anything with his left hand, and that this interfered with his ability to hold items, Plaintiff stated he was able to do dishes. ... Similarly, the ALJ explained that Plaintiff’s ability to drive regularly and to execute the movements typically involved in driving, such as turning the key, adjusting volume and heat controls, opening the door and putting on a seat belt undermine Plaintiff’s contention of manipulative limitations. ... Moreover, as discussed above, the ALJ also considered the objective medical evidence that undermined Plaintiff’s assertions about the severity of his symptoms and limitations. ... The ALJ's subjective symptom analysis was not patently wrong, and thus we will not disturb it under our deferential standard of review.

Section 404.1529(c)(3) requires an ALJ considering daily activities to explain any inconsistency between those activities, the claimant's complaints, and the medical evidence.

Elkins v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2024-08-05(c)(3)

An ALJ is to consider a claimant’s activities of daily living when she evaluates his subjective allegations, 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1529(c)(3), 416.929(c)(3); SSR 16-3p, 2017 WL 5180304, at *7 (Oct. 25, 2017), but in doing so she must explain any inconsistencies between the claimant’s activities, his complaints, and the medical evidence, Zurawski, 245 F.3d at 887.

An ALJ may use objective findings, treatment evidence, and medical opinions to find that mental symptoms cause no more than minimal work limitations.

Ali v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2023-07-26(c)(2)–(3)

In short, the ALJ reasonably relied upon the evidence articulated above to conclude that Plaintiffs mental impairments were “non-severe.” See 20 C.F.R. § 404.1529(c)(2), (3).

Section 404.1529(c) requires an ALJ to assess symptom severity using the medical evidence in context and to explain why reported activities conflict with alleged limitations.

Frankovis-Miesfeld v. Saul · filed 2021-01-26(c)

The ALJ’s assessment of the severity of Frankovis-Miesfeld’s symptoms appears to have been based on an incomplete, if not incorrect, view of the medical evidence that, at times, considered evidence without due regard for the context in which certain statements were made. The ALJ also failed to adequately explain how Frankovis-Miesfeld’s reported activities were inconsistent with her alleged limitations. Therefore, remand is required.

When treatment noncompliance bears on symptom consistency, the adjudicator must examine possible explanations and whether the noncompliance itself is a symptom of a mental impairment.

Odom v. Saul · filed 2023-08-21(c)(1)

Even so, the ALJ must “review the case record to determine whether there are explanations” for a claimant’s failure or inability to comply with treatment. ... Importantly, SSA regulations dictate that an ALJ must interrogate whether any purported noncompliance with mental health treatment is itself a symptom of a claimant’s ailments. ... The ALJ failed to conduct any meaningful inquiry into Plaintiff’s alleged noncompliance and how such an inability to follow the treatment prescribed could be a symptom of his mental impairments.

Section 404.1529(c)(3) requires consideration and explanation of possible reasons for limited treatment before drawing an adverse inference from it.

Wheeler v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2024-03-15(c)(3)

The ALJ’s analysis of Plaintiff’s symptom severity does not comply with the applicable rules and regulations. Specifically, the ALJ erred when analyzing Plaintiff’s treatment history. For this reason, the Court reverses and remands the ALJ’s decision.

Section 404.1529 requires consideration of explanations for treatment noncompliance before using it to discount subjective symptoms.

Luciano v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2024-03-18(c)(3)(i)–(vii)

Although an ALJ may properly consider a claimant’s noncompliance with recommended treatment in evaluating her subjective symptoms, the ALJ may not discount a claimant’s subjective symptoms based upon noncompliance with treatment recommendations without first considering potential explanations for the noncompliance.

Section 404.1529’s symptom analysis does not permit an ALJ to draw an adverse inference from limited or missed treatment without considering the claimant’s possible reasons for it.

Boyd v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2024-08-30(c)(3)

The ALJ’s evaluation of Plaintiff’s symptoms was governed by a detailed Social Security regulation (20 C.F.R. § 404.1529) and Social Security Ruling (SSR) 16-3p, which mandates a two-step process for evaluating an individual’s symptoms. ... However, the ALJ “will not find an individual’s symptoms inconsistent . . . on this basis without considering possible reasons he or she may not comply with treatment or seek treatment consistent with the degree of his or her complaints.” SSR 16-3p at *9. ... The ALJ’s analysis of Plaintiff’s symptom severity does not comply with the applicable rules and regulations. Specifically, the ALJ erred when analyzing Plaintiff’s treatment history and failing to consider possible reasons why Plaintiff did not seek treatment at a level consistent with the degree of his complaints.

Under the symptom-evaluation framework governed by section 404.1529, an ALJ may not rely on treatment noncompliance without considering and explaining the claimant's possible reasons for not following or seeking treatment.

Calloway v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2024-09-05

The ALJ did not, however, analyze why Plaintiff did not comply with treatment recommendations. The ALJ was required to “consider[] possible reasons [Plaintiff] may not comply with treatment” before relying on a lack of treatment to conclude that his symptoms were inconsistent with the evidence in the record.

Once an impairment could reasonably produce subjective symptoms, § 404.1529(c) requires the ALJ to evaluate their intensity and persistence to determine how they limit the claimant’s ability to work.

Crawford · filed 2025-12-23(c)

When evidence in the record shows an impairment that reasonably could produce the claimant’s subjective symptoms, the ALJ must evaluate the intensity and persistence of the symptoms to determine how those symptoms limit the claimant’s ability to work. 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1529(c), 416.929(c).

An ALJ making a holistic RFC assessment considers daily activities, symptom characteristics, medication and side effects, other treatment, relief measures, and functional limitations.

Cnossen v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2023-08-07(c)(3)

In making this holistic assessment, the ALJ considers evidence such as the claimant’s daily activities; the location, duration, frequency, and intensity of the claimant’s pain or other symptoms; the type, dosage, effectiveness, and side effects of any medication or other treatment the claimant takes or has taken to alleviate pain or other symptoms; treatment, other than medication, the claimant receives or has received for relief of pain or other symptoms; any measures the claimant uses or has used to relieve pain or symptoms; and any other factors concerning the claimant’s functional limitations and restrictions. 20 C.F.R. § 404.1529(c)(3).

Section 404.1529(a) requires an ALJ to evaluate subjective symptom statements and source descriptions of their effect on work; merely acknowledging fatigue without analyzing whether the RFC accommodates it or explaining its rejection is insufficient.

Merriman · filed 2026-02-06(a)

The ALJ evaluates the intensity, persistence, and limiting effects of symptoms by considering a claimant’s subjective statements and complaints related to their symptoms and pain, as well as any description medical sources and other nonmedical sources provide about how these symptoms affect a claimant’s ability to work. See 20 C.F.R. § 404.1529(a). ... The ALJ never explains whether the assessed RFC limitations accommodate her fatigue or, in the alternative, articulate reasons why the ALJ rejected her complaints of fatigue. This warrants remand.

Section 404.1529(c) requires an ALJ to consider a claimant’s reasons for not pursuing treatment before using that failure to discount reported symptoms.

Haynes · filed 2025-11-17(c)

The Court finds the ALJ erred in failing to address Claimant’s reasons for not pursuing therapy while relying on that purported failure to characterize Claimant’s treatment as conservative and discredit Claimant’s description of her symptoms.

Boilerplate stating that symptom allegations are inconsistent with the record is insufficient unless the ALJ explicitly and adequately explains the reasons for discounting the testimony.

Rodriguez v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2023-08-08(c)(3)

The ALJ also failed to provide an explicit and adequate explanation for discrediting Plaintiff’s testimony. See Martinez v. Comm’r of Soc. Sec., No. 21-12116, 2022 WL 1531582, at *2 (11th Cir. May 16, 2022). Not articulating clear and adequate reasons to discount Plaintiff’s subjective statements is not merely harmless error because had the ALJ credited Plaintiff’s subjective complaints, the outcome may have been different.

Using the phrase “not entirely consistent” to describe symptom statements does not impose an improper standard when context shows the ALJ meant that the weight of the evidence did not support all of the claimant's allegations.

Rodriguez v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2024-09-10(c)

The Court found, “[b]ut we do not read the ALJ’s language that way. It is clear to us, given the context, that the ALJ merely used a polite way to say the weight of the evidence did not support all [of the plaintiff’s] claims.” Id. This reasoning is persuasive and the Court adopts it for this case. Thus, the ALJ applied the correct legal standard to analyze Plaintiff’s subjective statements.

Section 404.1529(c)(3) requires discussion only of factors pertinent to the evidence, with specific reasons that are clear and supported by the record.

Starkey v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2024-03-06(c)(3)

The ALJ need only discuss those factors that are pertinent based upon the evidence in the record. Id. The ALJ's discussion of the applicable factors “must contain specific reasons for the weight given to the individual's symptoms, be consistent with and supported by the evidence, and be clearly articulated so the individual and any subsequent reviewer can assess how the adjudicator evaluated the individual's symptoms.” Id. at *10.

Section 404.1529(c)(4) does not require a formal factor-by-factor recitation when the ALJ identifies the specific evidence supporting the finding that symptom statements conflict with the record.

Groves v. Commissioner, Social Security Administration · filed 2024-09-09(c)(4)

However, an ALJ is not required to “make a formalistic factor-by-factor recitation of the evidence” so long as he “sets forth the specific evidence he relies on in evaluating the claimant’s credibility.” Orso v. Colvin, 658 F. App’x 418, 421 (10th Cir. 2016) (unpublished) (quoting Keyes–Zachary v. Astrue, 695 F.3d 1156, 1167 (10th Cir. 2012)). ... Because the ALJ set forth the specific evidence he relied on in evaluating whether Mr. Groves’ testimony was consistent with the record, the Court finds that the ALJ’s determination—that Mr. Groves’ statements concerning the intensity, persistence, and limiting effects of his symptoms were not entirely consistent with the medical evidence and other evidence in the record—is supported by substantial evidence.

An ALJ’s symptom evaluation may satisfy § 404.1529(c)(3) without a dedicated factor-by-factor section when the decision, read holistically, discusses the claimant’s activities, medications, and treatment history and identifies record support for its findings.

Steger v. Bisignano · filed 2025-08-25(c)(3)

But again, the Seventh Circuit has encouraged reviewing courts to read an ALJ’s decision holistically and the Court will not find an ALJ’s subjective symptom analysis was “patently wrong” merely because the decision does not include a dedicated section for that analysis. See, e.g., Zellweger, 984 F.3d at 1252; Curvin, 778 F.3d at 650; Rice, 384 F.3d at 370 n. 5; Orlando, 776 F.2d at 213.

Section 404.1529(a) permits an ALJ to compare alleged functional limitations with radiology findings and other evidence, while requiring the RFC to rest on the record as a whole.

McGinnis v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2023-08-14(a)

Beyond step three, the ALJ’s reference to the radiology reports was more observation than analysis; in essence, the ALJ observed that the radiologist’s reports did not confirm that David’s symptoms were as severe as he testified. ... Second, and even more important, the ALJ based the RFC finding not on the radiologist’s reports but on the rest of the record, including the medical opinions.

Section 404.1529(c) requires the ALJ to expressly address material symptom reports and explain why their related restrictions are omitted from the RFC.

Kanski v. Kijakazi · filed 2023-08-15(c)

The ALJ did not expressly discount these symptom reports; nor did the ALJ explain with any specificity why the related restrictions were omitted from the RFC.

Section 404.1529(c)(3) requires consideration of medical and nonmedical evidence, but does not require absenteeism restrictions unsupported by medical evidence after the alleged symptom severity is reasonably rejected.

Pelley v. SSA · filed 2024-03-06(c)(3)

Under the regulations, the ALJ’s assessment suffices and the ALJ was not required to analyze records and evidence that did not support additional limitations related to absenteeism.

Sections 404.1529(c)(3)–(4) permit an ALJ to omit urinary-frequency restrictions when treatment, record evidence, and the claimant’s statements do not support more than minimal limitation.

Horace v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2024-03-18(c)(3)–(4)

The ALJ—having appropriately determined the urinary frequency and/or incontinence was not severe and that Plaintiff’s subjective complaints are not entirely consistent with the medical evidence and other evidence—did not err in electing not to include in the RFC any specific limitations in this regard.

Section 404.1529(c)(3) permits an ALJ to reject subjective symptom assertions without stating precisely which allegations were accepted when the ALJ gives an adequate, supported rationale and accounts for accepted symptoms in the residual functional capacity.

Matos Arroyo v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2024-09-09(c)(3)

Plaintiff does not challenge any of these findings, instead arguing the ALJ should have stated precisely which allegations he was accepting. Pl.’s Mem. at 23. The ALJ, however, followed applicable authority in assessing Plaintiff’s subjective symptoms. To the extent they were accepted, the ALJ accounted for them in the RFC finding. See Tr. at 24. Otherwise, the ALJ provided adequate and supported rationale for rejecting the subjective assertions. The ALJ did not err.

Section 404.1529 requires an ALJ to explain why symptom-related work limitations supported by the record are omitted from the residual functional capacity.

Finkin · filed 2025-12-18(c)

Upon consideration, we find that the ALJ failed to adequately account for the plaintiff’s fatigue and provided no explanation for the omission of any off-task time relating to his need to rest in the RFC, a factor which undeniably affects Finkin’s ability to work on a sustained basis. Thus, in the instant case we conclude that the ALJ’s burden of articulation has not been met.

Section 404.1529(c)(3)(i) requires consideration of daily-activity evidence and record inconsistencies when weighing symptom allegations; doing so is not itself a finding of fraud.

Wies, Martin v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2023-08-17(c)(3)(i)

In assessing Wies’s subjective complaints and the medical opinions, the ALJ did consider the investigation report, which included evidence about Wies’s activities of daily living. But that is what the ALJ was required to do under agency rules. ... Considering inconsistencies in the record is not a finding of fraud; it is simply part of the ALJ’s obligation to weigh the evidence.

An ALJ applying the Eleventh Circuit pain standard must evaluate objective evidence, symptom characteristics, activities, aggravating factors, medication effectiveness, treatment, relief measures, and conflicting statements.

Finch v. Social Security Administration, Commissioner · filed 2023-08-17(a)–(c)

In evaluating the extent to which the Plaintiff’s symptoms, such as pain, affect his capacity to perform basic work activities, the ALJ will consider (1) objective medical evidence, (2) the nature of Plaintiff’s symptoms, (3) the Plaintiff’s daily activities, (4) precipitating and aggravating factors, (5) the effectiveness of medication, (6) treatment sought for relief of symptoms, (7) any measures the Plaintiff takes to relieve symptoms, and (8) any conflicts between a Plaintiff’s statements and the rest of evidence.

When objective evidence does not confirm alleged severity but an impairment could cause some symptoms, the ALJ evaluates intensity, persistence, and work effects using objective evidence, activities, treatment, medication, and other functional factors.

HAYES v. COMMISSIONER OF SOCIAL SECURITY · filed 2023-09-12

If the objective medical evidence does not confirm the severity of the alleged symptoms, but indicates the claimant’s impairment could reasonably be expected to produce some degree of pain and other symptoms, the ALJ evaluates the intensity and persistence of the claimant’s symptoms and their effect on her ability to work by considering the objective medical evidence, the claimant’s daily activities, treatment and medications received, and other factors concerning functional limitations and restrictions due to pain. See 20 C.F.R. § 404.1529.

Sections 404.1529(a)–(b) apply the Eleventh Circuit’s pain standard, requiring an underlying condition plus objective confirmation of severity or a condition reasonably expected to cause the alleged symptoms.

Bradley v. Social Security Administration, Commissioner · filed 2024-02-16(a)–(b)

The plaintiff must show (1) evidence of an underlying medical condition and (2) either (a) objective medical evidence that confirms the severity of the alleged symptoms arising from the condition, or (b) that the objectively determined medical condition is of such severity that it can reasonably be expected to give rise to the alleged symptoms. See 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1529(a), (b), 416.929(a), (b); SSR 16-3p, 2016 WL 1119029; Wilson v. Barnhart, 284 F.3d 1219, 1225 (11th Cir. 2002).

Section 404.1529(c) requires the ALJ, after finding an impairment that could cause the alleged symptoms, to evaluate their intensity, persistence, and effects on the ability to work using objective evidence and the regulatory symptom factors.

Martin · filed 2026-06-17(c)

If the first part of the pain standard is satisfied, the ALJ then evaluates the intensity and persistence of a claimant’s alleged symptoms and their effect on her ability to work. ... In evaluating the extent to which a claimant’s symptoms affect her capacity to perform basic work activities, the ALJ will consider (1) objective medical evidence, (2) the nature of a claimant’s symptoms, (3) the claimant’s daily activities, (4) precipitating and aggravating factors, (5) the effectiveness of medication, (6) treatment sought for relief of symptoms, (7) any measures the claimant takes to relieve symptoms, and (8) any conflicts between a claimant’s statements and the rest of the evidence. ... Substantial evidence supports the ALJ’s finding under the pain standard. The ALJ properly applied the pain standard and clearly articulated reasons for discounting Ms. Martin’s subjective allegations of disabling symptoms.

Section 404.1529(a) provides that a claimant’s statements about symptoms alone cannot establish disability.

Vitko v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2020-01-31(a)

Plaintiff’s subjective reports of her symptoms, by themselves, cannot be the basis for a finding of disability.

A claimant’s statements about pain or other symptoms alone do not establish disability.

Richardson v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2022-10-21(a)

ALJ Sparks expressly stated that Dr. Miller’s opinions were “only somewhat persuasive as it [was] based on a cursory one-time examination and largely upon subjective complaints of the claimant” (Tr. 813). See 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1529(a), 416.929(a) (“statements about your pain or other symptoms will not alone establish that you are disabled”). The ALJ appropriately analyzed the opinion of Dr. Miller and her analysis was sufficient for the Court to follow her rationale for not accepting all limitations opined.

Section 404.1529(a) requires an ALJ to consider a claimant’s symptom statements and nonmedical descriptions of how those symptoms affect the claimant’s ability to work.

Huey v. Kijakazi · filed 2023-01-20(a)

The ALJ must, as to medically determinable impairments, “consider all of [a claimant’s] statements about [his] symptoms, such as pain, and any description . . . nonmedical sources may provide about how the symptoms affect [the claimant’s] ability to work,” see 20 C.F.R. § 404.1529(a), and, in assessing the RFC, must “consider descriptions and observations of [the claimant’s] limitations from [the claimant’s] impairment(s), including limitations that result from [the claimant’s] symptoms, such as pain,” see id. § 404.1545(a)(3).

A claimant’s statements about symptoms alone cannot establish disability.

Camilloni v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2023-02-28(a)

While Plaintiff cites to her own IBS-related allegations in support of her argument that the RFC should have contained a limitation related to bathroom use (see ECF No. 9-1 at 19-21), a claimant’s own statements are insufficient to establish disability. See 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1529(a), 416.929(a) (“statements about your pain or other symptoms will not alone establish that you are disabled”).

Section 404.1529(a) provides that a claimant’s statements about symptoms alone cannot establish disability.

Brittain v. Commissioner of Social Security Administration · filed 2024-02-29(a)

But a claimant’s statements regarding her symptoms cannot establish disability.

Sections 404.1529(c)(3)–(4) allow objective evidence to be contrasted with pain testimony when evaluating intensity and persistence; satisfying the threshold pain standard does not require accepting every claimed limitation.

Holcomb v. Social Security Administration, Commissioner · filed 2024-03-19(c)(3)–(4)

The ALJ was entitled to contrast Holcomb’s testimony with the objective evidence of record indicating that Holcomb was not as limited as his testimony indicated.

Section 404.1529(c)(2) prohibits rejecting symptom testimony solely because objective medical evidence fails to substantiate it and requires additional reasons when testimony is uncorroborated rather than contradicted.

(SS) Smith v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2024-01-18(c)(2)

“The fact that a claimant’s testimony is not fully corroborated by the objective medical findings, in and of itself, is not a clear and convincing reason for rejecting it.” Vertigan v. Halter, 260 F.3d 1044, 1049 (9th Cir. 2001). See also 20 C.F.R. § 404.1529(c)(2) (“[W]e will not reject your statements about the intensity and persistence of your pain or other symptoms or about the effect your symptoms have on your ability solely because the objective medical evidence does not substantiate your statements.”). Rather, where a claimant’s symptom testimony is not fully substantiated by the objective medical record, the ALJ must provide additional reasons for discounting the testimony.

An ALJ may not discount symptom allegations solely from medical records and must specifically explain what other evidence was considered and how it affected the analysis.

Solis v. Social Security Administration Commissioner · filed 2023-08-25(c)(3)

Although the ALJ referenced “other evidence,” she did not specifically discuss what that “other evidence” was or how it impacted her analysis of Plaintiff’s subjective complaints. Based upon this review, the Court finds the ALJ improperly discounted Plaintiff’s subjective allegations based solely upon her medical records.

Section 404.1529(c)(4) does not permit discounting symptom reports based merely on a discrepancy in how long medication was taken unless the ALJ explains why the discrepancy matters to symptom severity or work capacity.

ALLGOOD v. O'MALLEY · filed 2025-09-22(c)(4)

Although the record, as outlined by Plaintiff above, indicates that, as of October 7, 2021, Plaintiff had not yet started Enbrel (see Tr. 940), and, thus, that he could not have taken it for two years by the time of the hearing on May 10, 2023, as he testified (see Tr. 59), the ALJ failed to explain the significance of that discrepancy (see Tr. 27). ... Under such circumstances, the difference between Plaintiff taking Enbrel for one versus two years did not provide a sound basis for discounting Plaintiff’s subjective symptom reports.

Section 404.1529(c)(3) permits daily activities, treatment methods, and treatment effectiveness to inform whether alleged symptoms support disabling limitations.

Schroff v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2023-08-25(c)(3)(i), (c)(3)(iv)-(v)

Here, the ALJ also considered Plaintiff’s reported activities to support the RFC assessment. ... The ALJ also discussed Plaintiff’s treatment modalities. See 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1529(c)(3)(iv)-(v), 416.929(c)(3)(iv)-(v) (adjudicator properly considers the treatment modalities utilized, and the effectiveness of treatment to relieve pain and other symptoms). ... Based on the foregoing, Plaintiff’s daily activities and treatment modalities do not support a finding that Plaintiff’s condition is disabling.

Section 404.1529(c)(3) permits an ALJ to consider treatment methods and their effectiveness, along with daily activities, when assessing residual functional capacity.

Smouse v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2023-01-13(c)(3)

In addition to the opinion from Dr. Angelotti, ALJ Bell supported her RFC finding with additional substantial evidence from the record such as explained plaintiff’s treatment records indicating largely normal or mild findings as well as medical reports of significant improvement with conservative treatment. (Tr. 21). See 20 C.F.R. §§404.1529(c)(3)(iv)-(v), 416.929(c)(3)(iv)- (v)(adjudicator properly considers the claimant’s treatment modalities and their effectiveness). ... The ALJ properly considered plaintiff’s activities of daily living, including reports of exercising regularly, planning a trip to Florida, cooking, cleaning, and caring for a four-year old child. (Tr. 20; citing Tr. 460); see 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1529(c)(3)(i), 416.929(c)(3)(i).

Section 404.1529(c)(3) permits consideration of treatment effectiveness and daily activities in evaluating symptoms, including a claimant’s stated reason for declining further treatment.

Middleton · filed 2026-03-06(c)(3)

But the ALJ specifically noted Plaintiff’s hesitance in his opinion, which shows that he considered Plaintiff’s reasoning before making a negative inference. ... Finally, the ALJ also considered Plaintiff’s daily activities in support of his finding that Plaintiff was not as disabled as he alleged.

Section 404.1529(c) requires an ALJ evaluating symptoms to consider why a claimant did not seek treatment and the limits on how the claimant performs daily activities.

Main v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2021-09-29(c)

The ALJ’s analysis of Mr. Main’s conservative treatment history was invalid because he did not sufficiently explore Mr. Main’s explanations as to the lack of medical care. Additionally, the ALJ’s analysis of Mr. Main’s daily activities erred because he failed to acknowledge the difference between performing daily activities and going to work full-time, and also failed to consider the qualifications on those activities.

Section 404.1529(c)(3) permits an ALJ to consider a claimant’s daily activities and treatment when evaluating symptoms.

Martin v. Kijakazi · filed 2022-04-15(c)(3)

In addition to the objective medical findings described above, an ALJ can consider the claimant’s daily activities and treatment received for symptoms. 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1529(c)(3). The ALJ considered Martin’s asbestos lung disease and subjective symptoms and properly considered the objective testing and other exam findings as well as the recommended conservative course of treatment in determining her residual functional capacity.

Section 404.1529(c)(3)(iv) makes treatment effectiveness relevant to evaluation of alleged symptoms.

Caldwell v. Commissioner Social Security Administration · filed 2024-01-03(c)(3)(iv)

The effectiveness of treatment is relevant to the evaluation of a person’s alleged symptoms. 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1529(c)(3)(iv), 416.929(c)(3)(iv).

Section 404.1529(c)(3)(iv)-(v) permits an ALJ to consider treatment effectiveness when evaluating symptom testimony.

Grammer v. Commissioner Social Security Administration · filed 2023-12-05(c)(3)(iv)-(v)

An ALJ may consider the effectiveness of treatment when evaluating a claimant’s symptom testimony. 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1529(c)(3)(iv)-(v), 416.929(c)(3)(iv)-(v).

An ALJ evaluating subjective complaints may consider symptom frequency and intensity and the effectiveness of medication and other treatment.

Quarbani v. Kijakazi · filed 2023-09-01(c)(3)(ii), (iv), (v)

Consequently, the ALJ concluded that the plaintiff’s medical records did not reflect that the plaintiff experienced intense symptomology during the relevant period, and noted that the plaintiff managed his coronary artery disease with medication. (Tr. 27); see 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1529(c)(3)(ii), (iv), (v) (directing that an ALJ’s evaluation of a claimant’s subjective complaints include consideration of the frequency and intensity of a claimant’s symptoms and the effectiveness of medication and other treatment).

Section 404.1529(c)(4) requires subjective symptoms to be evaluated against a complete record backdrop rather than incomplete medical evidence.

C.D.I. v. Commissioner, SSA · filed 2024-05-29(c)(4)

The ALJ accordingly considers a claimant’s subjective symptoms against the backdrop of the other record evidence. ... Here, the backdrop against which the ALJ considered C.D.I.’s fatigue symptoms was incomplete.

Section 404.1529(c) requires consideration of all available medical and nonmedical evidence about symptoms and forbids selecting favorable treatment-record portions while ignoring significantly probative contrary evidence.

Romero v. Social Security Administration · filed 2023-09-06(c)

In reaching this conclusion at step two of the symptom evaluation process, the ALJ failed to adequately consider the objective medical evidence and treatment records from Ms. Romero’s primary treating healthcare provider, CNP Marcus. See 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1529(c), 416.929(c) (ALJ must consider “all of the available evidence” including objective medical evidence and other information from medical sources about the claimant’s pain or other symptoms). The ALJ impermissibly picked and chose portions of CNP Marcus’s reports that were “favorable to [the ALJ’s] position while ignoring other evidence.”

Section 404.1529(c)(1) requires an ALJ assessing pain complaints to consider all available evidence, including evidence that physical pain has a mental component.

Honaker v. Kijakazi · filed 2023-10-10(c)(1)

Because the ALJ must consider all available evidence in assessing complaints of pain, the ALJ’s failure to acknowledge or discuss Plaintiff’s chronic pain syndrome was error.

Sections 404.1529(c)(1)–(4) require evaluation of all medical and nonmedical evidence and comparison of subjective complaints with the evidence as a whole.

Ginder v. KIJAKAZI · filed 2024-04-18(c)(1)–(4)

Subjective complaints are evidence, but they are only one kind of evidence, and they are evaluated in relation to the evidence as a whole.

Section 404.1529(c) requires consideration of all record evidence to determine how symptoms limit work activities.

Shellard v. O'Malley · filed 2024-05-16(c)

The ALJ is instructed to “consider all of the evidence in an individual’s record,” to “determine how symptoms limit ability to perform work-related activities.”

Section 404.1529 requires an ALJ to consider all relevant evidence when evaluating the intensity and persistence of symptoms from a medically determinable impairment.

Gonzalez · filed 2025-12-22(c)

Moreover, notably absent from the written decision is any consideration of records from the Idaho Arthritis Cener relevant to hand pain and an ultrasound of Plaintiff’s hands, both of which are more recent than the medical records of normal physical findings relied on by the ALJ at step three and in discussing normal physical exam findings. (AR 21, 23). It was error for the ALJ not to consider all of the relevant evidence in the record when evaluating the intensity and persistence of Plaintiff’s symptoms of hand pain and limited functioning resulting from her medically determinable impairment of rheumatoid arthritis. SSR 16-3p; 20 C.F.R. § 404.1529.

Section 404.1529(a) requires an ALJ determining residual functional capacity to consider all relevant evidence, including the claimant’s testimony and limitations that are not severe.

Crossley · filed 2026-01-14(a)

In making a proper RFC determination, an ALJ must consider all the relevant evidence in the record, even evidence relating to limitations that are not severe. Id.; see 20 C.F.R. § 404.1529(a).

Section 404.1529(c) requires consideration of medical evidence, claimant statements, medical-source information, and other relevant evidence.

Hodge · filed 2026-03-13(c)

When formulating a Claimant’s RFC, an ALJ must look to medical evidence, statements by the claimant, other information provided by medical sources, and any other relevant evidence in the record. 20 C.F.R. § 404.1529(c); Social Security Ruling (“SSR”) 16-3p, 2017 WL 5180304.

An ALJ must review all available evidence of symptom intensity, persistence, and functional effects and may not overlook extensive treatment evidence consistent with the alleged symptoms.

Jones v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2023-09-06(a)–(c)(3)

To the extent the Commissioner argues that the ALJ was not required to analyze every piece of evidence, conversely he could not overlook extensive evidence of medical treatment that was highly relevant to an accurate assessment of Plaintiff’s alleged symptoms. See 20 C.F.R. § 404.1529(c)(3)(v).

Section 404.1529(c)(3)(iv)-(v) and (c)(4) permit an ALJ to evaluate symptom testimony using the effectiveness of medication and treatment and the consistency of the claimant’s allegations with objective and other evidence.

Michael Trogdon, II v. O'Malley · filed 2024-08-27(c)(3)(iv)-(v), (c)(4)

The Administrative Law Judge (“ALJ”) provided clear and convincing reasons supported by substantial evidence for discounting Trogdon’s testimony regarding the severity of his symptoms, including inconsistency with the medical record and Trogdon’s daily activities, and evidence that his symptoms had improved with treatment. See 20 C.F.R. § 404.1529(c)(3)(iv)-(v) (explaining that the ALJ considers the effectiveness of medications and other treatment in evaluating the reliability of symptom testimony); id. § 404.1529(c)(4) (explaining that the ALJ considers the extent to which the claimant’s allegations are consistent with the objective medical and other evidence); Smartt, 53 F.4th at 499 (explaining that the ALJ may discredit a claimant’s symptoms testimony as inconsistent with reported daily activities); see also id. at 497 (“When a claimant presents objective medical evidence establishing an impairment ‘that could reasonably produce the symptoms of which she complains, an adverse credibility finding must be based on clear and convincing reasons.’” (citation omitted)).

Section 404.1529(c) permits daily activities, treatment history, objective inconsistency, and improvement with treatment to inform the reliability of subjective symptom complaints.

Hannah v. Commissioner Social Security Administration · filed 2023-09-06(c)(2), (c)(3)(i), (c)(3)(iv)-(v)

The ALJ reasonably considered plaintiff’s ability to engage in activities of daily living inconsistent with the alleged severity of her symptoms and substantial evidence supports the ALJ’s findings. ... The ALJ reasonably considered plaintiff’s limited and often sporadic treatment in evaluating the reliability of her subjective symptom statements. ... The ALJ reasonably considered plaintiff’s improvements with treatment and stable condition.

Section 404.1529(c)(3) permits an ALJ to find claimed symptom intensity and persistence inconsistent with treatment records, examination findings, and daily activities after examining the entire case record.

Erickson v. Kijakazi · filed 2022-03-21(c)(3)

The ALJ did not err in finding that the claimed intensity, persistence, and limiting effects of Plaintiff’s symptoms were inconsistent with treatment records and examination findings. Plaintiff also challenges the ALJ’s consideration of his daily activities. It is well established, however, that an ALJ can consider activities such as driving, doing odd jobs and construction, painting, shopping, cooking, cleaning, exercising, fishing, riding a motorcycle, traveling, and woodworking as inconsistent with subjective statements of disabling symptoms.

An ALJ may rely on treatment response, treatment intensity, objective findings, and daily activities when discounting symptom statements.

Lavold v. Kijakazi · filed 2023-09-08(c)(3)

The regulations and precedent support the ALJ’s reliance on these reasons in discounting Claimant’s subjective statements. See 20 C.F.R. §404.1529(c)(3); SSR 16-3p, 2017 WL 518004, at *7.

Section 404.1529(c)(3) permits an ALJ to evaluate symptoms using daily activities, medication effectiveness, treatment, and other evidence of functional limitations, provided the ALJ gives specific reasons grounded in the whole record.

Dawson v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2023-10-13(c)(3)

Factors relevant to this analysis include daily activities, types and effectiveness of medications, treatment received to address symptoms, and other factors concerning a claimant’s functional limitations and restrictions due to pain or other symptoms. See SSR 16-3p, 82 Fed. Reg. 49462, 49465-49466; 20 C.F.R. 404.1529(c)(3). Here, a review of the ALJ decision reveals that she considered the entire record, based her findings on multiple relevant factors, and provided “specific reasons for the weight given to the individual’s symptoms,” SSR 16-3p, 82 Fed Reg. 49462, 49467.

Section 404.1529(c)(3) allows an ALJ to assess functional limitations by considering objective medical evidence, daily activities, and the duration and intensity of symptoms and pain.

Clement v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2023-10-16(c)(3)

In sum, the ALJ relied upon substantial evidence, including objective medical evidence, Plaintiff’s activities of daily living, and the duration and intensity of Plaintiff’s symptoms and pain, in evaluating the functional limitations imposed by Plaintiff’s alleged symptoms. Plaintiff has not shown a compelling reason why this credibility determination should be disturbed.

Section 404.1529(c)(3) is satisfied when an ALJ evaluates treatment history, medication, clinical and objective evidence, daily activities, and opinion evidence and provides record-supported reasons for discounting claimed symptoms.

RAHN v. KIJAKAZI · filed 2022-03-21(c)(3)

The ALJ explained her consideration of Plaintiff's treatment history, medications, treatment other than medications, clinical exams and objective medical evidence, activities of daily living, and the opinions in the record. (Id.). Moreover, as required by 20 C.F.R. § 404.1504, the ALJ considered the relevant supporting evidence underlying the insurer's opinion as well. (Id.). The ALJ provided sufficient reasons, supported by the record, to discount the Plaintiff's subjective symptoms and, thus, the Court cannot find the ALJ's credibility analysis was patently wrong.

Section 404.1529(c)(3) permits an ALJ to find symptom testimony inconsistent with the record after considering daily activities, symptom intensity and persistence, aggravating factors, and medication effectiveness.

Andrews v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2022-05-02(c)(3)

The Court finds the ALJ cited to substantial evidence to support his ... conclusion that Plaintiff’s symptom testimony was inconsistent with the evidence ... in the record.

An ALJ’s statement that all symptoms were considered under § 404.1529, together with substantive discussion, can show that severe and nonsevere impairments were considered in the RFC.

Pugh v. Kijakazi(CONSENT) · filed 2023-09-11

Based upon such statements, the court concludes that the ALJ properly considered all of Plaintiff’s impairments, whether severe or not, when considering the evidence of record.

Section 404.1529(c) requires an ALJ to consider how symptoms of a medically determinable impairment affect a claimant’s ability to work, even when the impairment is non-severe.

Gutierrez v. Social Security Administration · filed 2023-03-23(c)

ALJ Swayze was thus required to consider how headaches, a symptom of a medically determinable impairment, affected Gutierrez’s residual functional capacity. See 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1529(c), 404.1545(e).

Subsection 404.1529(a) requires consideration of whether a diagnosed impairment could reasonably produce alleged symptoms; merely addressing pain symptoms is not equivalent to evaluating chronic pain syndrome as a distinct impairment with physical and psychological effects.

Edwards · filed 2026-03-19(a)

The Court rejects Defendant’s argument that Plaintiff’s CPS was adequately considered. While the ALJ clearly considered at least some of Plaintiff’s “pain” and/or “chronic pain” when formulating the RFC, “consideration of a diagnosis is not the same as consideration of a symptom.” See 20 C.F.R. § 404.1529(a). As Plaintiff notes, CPS is more than just the chronic pain caused by an initial injury. (Doc. 13 at 13-14). CPS is itself “capable of producing disabling pain.” Bakalarski v. Apfel, No. 97-1107, 1997 U.S. App. LEXIS 34055, at * 6, 1997 WL 748653, at *2 (10th Cir. Dec. 3, 1997).

An x-ray showing degenerative changes is a medically acceptable diagnostic technique that can satisfy Section 404.1529(b)’s requirement for evidence establishing a medically determinable impairment.

GRANT v. KIJAKAZI · filed 2022-02-28(b)

However, Plaintiff’s chest x-ray on October 9, 2015, revealed “[m]ild degenerative changes [in the] thoracic spine.” (Tr. 568.) This x-ray qualifies as a medically acceptable diagnostic technique, 20 CFR § 404.1502(c), satisfying the requirements of 20 CFR § 404.1529(b).

Under § 404.1529(b), pain is a symptom rather than a standalone impairment and must result from a medically determinable impairment, though its resulting limitations must still be considered.

Ramirez v. Kijakazi · filed 2023-09-11(b)

As noted by the Commissioner, pain is a symptom produced by a medically-determinable impairment. (Doc. 15, at 15-16); see 20 C.F.R. § 404.1529(b). ... In sum, the Court is not persuaded that the ALJ failed to address symptoms related to these alleged impairments because the sleeping difficulties were addressed as a symptom of Ramirez’s mental impairments and Ramirez has not shown that the shoulder pain was alleged by Ramirez or diagnosed by a medical source.

Section 404.1529(b) does not permit alleged symptoms to affect the assessment of basic work activities unless medical signs or laboratory findings establish a medically determinable impairment.

Austin v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2023-11-02(b)

Plaintiff did not present the necessary evidence here, therefore she does not meet the first step of the analysis. Accordingly, the ALJ was not required to evaluate the alleged symptoms associated with the condition. 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1529(b) (“Your symptoms . . . will not be found to affect your ability to do basic work activities unless medical signs or laboratory findings show that a medically determinable impairment(s) is present.”), 416.929(b) (same); see also SSR 96-8p (“[I]n assessing [a claimant’s residual functional capacity], the adjudicator must consider only limitations and restrictions attributable to medically determinable impairments.”).

Section 404.1529(a) requires separate consideration of the diagnosed impairment capable of producing symptoms and the symptoms themselves; discussing chronic pain does not establish that the ALJ considered a chronic-pain-syndrome diagnosis.

Terriquez v. Commissioner, Social Security Administration · filed 2023-12-19(a)

However, as evidenced by 20 C.F.R. § 404.1529(a), consideration of a diagnosis is not the same as consideration of a symptom. See also Bakalarski v. Apfel, 131 F.3d 151 (10th Cir. 1997) (holding that CPS is “capable of producing disabling pain” (emphasis added)); Howard v. Berryhill, No. 17-cv-00276-RBJ, 2017 WL 5507961, at *6 n.4 (D. Colo. Nov. 17, 2017) (declining to interpret “passing references to ‘pain’” in the ALJ decision “as the ALJ’s consideration of [plaintiff’s] chronic pain syndrome”).

Section 404.1529(b) does not allow symptoms alone to establish a medically determinable impairment affecting basic work activities; medical signs or laboratory findings are required.

Theil v. Social Security Administration, Commissioner · filed 2024-03-18(b)

Moreover, a claimant’s subjective complaints are insufficient to establish the existence of a medically determinable impairment, let alone a severe impairment. See 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1529(b), 416.929(b) (stating a claimant’s symptoms “will not be found to affect [the claimant’s] ability to do basic work activities unless medical signs or laboratory findings show that a medically determinable impairment(s) is present”).

An ALJ evaluates the § 404.1529(c) work-capacity factors only after medical signs or laboratory findings establish a medically determinable impairment capable of producing the symptoms.

B. · filed 2026-02-23(b), (c)(1)

Once “medical signs or laboratory findings show…a medically determinable impairment,” then an ALJ evaluates the factors in 20 C.F.R. § 404.1529(c) to determine a claimant’s capacity to work. 20 C.F.R. § 404.1529(c)(1). Thus, ALJ’s are not required to consider non-medically determinable impairments in formulating a claimant’s RFC.

Section 404.1529(c)(3) makes the effectiveness of medication a relevant consideration when assessing a claimant’s symptoms.

Gail V. v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2025-12-05(c)(3)

As such, Plaintiff’s argument that ALJ Loewy “erred by relying on Plaintiff’s ‘stable’ symptoms with medication as evidence that her impairments were non-severe” is unpersuasive given the plain text of the regulation and the law from this circuit.

An ALJ evaluating medication effects considers daily activities, symptom characteristics, aggravating factors, medication type and side effects, other treatment, relief measures, and functional restrictions.

Berlingeri-Otero v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2023-09-11(c)(3)

Social Security regulations establish the criteria for the ALJ to evaluate the effects of medications on a plaintiff.

Section 404.1529(c)(3)(iv) makes medication effectiveness relevant to symptom evaluation, and an ALJ may discount allegations when the broader record shows symptoms were well controlled with medication.

(SS) Galvan v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2024-09-06(c)(3)(iv)

The effectiveness of medication is relevant to the evaluation of a claimant’s symptom testimony. 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1529(c)(3)(iv); 416.929(c)(3)(iv). An ALJ may reject a claimant’s allegations based on “evidence suggesting that [the claimant] responded well to treatment” for the mental impairment(s) at issue.

Subsection 404.1529(c)(3)(iv) makes improvement with medication a relevant factor in evaluating symptom testimony, and effective control of symptoms can undermine a disability claim.

Taylor · filed 2026-02-09(c)(3)(iv)

An improvement of conditions with medical treatment is a relevant factor to consider in evaluating Plaintiff’s testimony. See 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1529(c)(3)(iv), 416.929(c)(3)(iv) (effectiveness of medical treatment); Wellington v. Berryhill, 878 F.3d 867, 876 (9th Cir. 2017) (“[E]vidence of medical treatment successfully relieving symptoms can undermine a claim of disability.”); see also Warre v. Comm’r of Soc. Sec. Admin., 439 F.3d 1001, 1006 (9th Cir. 2006) (“Impairments that can be controlled effectively with medication are not disabling for the purpose of determining eligibility for SSI benefits.”).

Section 404.1529(c)(3)(iv) requires an ALJ to consider medication effectiveness and permits finding symptoms less disabling when effective treatment controls them.

Ray · filed 2026-03-24(c)(3)(iv)

In fact, as the ALJ noted, Plaintiff indicated that she was “pleased with her current headache relief” on her Botox regimen (Tr. 20, citing Tr. 1619). ... “Since it is well established that ‘impairments that are controllable or amenable to treatment do not support a finding of total disability,’ the ALJ did not err in finding Plaintiff’s headaches were less disabling than alleged.”

Section 404.1529(c)(3)(iv) requires an ALJ to consider how effectively medication controls a claimant’s symptoms, including periods when it wears off.

KAPLAN v. COMMISSIONER OF SOCIAL SECURITY · filed 2020-07-24(c)(3)(iv)

In assessing a claimant’s subjective complaints of pain and other symptoms, the governing regulations require the ALJ to consider, among other things, the type, dosage, ... effectiveness, and side effects of any medications a claimant takes to control those symptoms. 20 C.F.R. § 404.1529(c)(3)(iv). ... The ALJ failed to consider the limitations presented by the on/off phenomenon associated with Plaintiff’s Parkinson’s medication, and misconstrued the doctor’s notations as Plaintiff’s noncompliance with his medication regimen.

Section 404.1529(c)(3)(iv) allows an ALJ to consider how effectively medication relieves pain when evaluating the intensity and persistence of a claimant’s symptoms.

Riggs v. Commissioner of Social Security Administration · filed 2020-11-25(c)(3)(iv)

Social Security regulations allow ALJs to consider the effectiveness of medications taken to alleviate pain when evaluating the intensity and persistence of a claimant’s subjective symptoms. See 20 C.F.R. § 404.1529(c)(3)(iv).

Section 404.1529(c)(3) permits an ALJ to consider how effectively medication controls a claimant’s symptoms.

Ranallo v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2021-01-06(c)(3)

How effectively medications control symptoms can support an ALJ’s finding that a claimant is not disabled.

Section 404.1529(c)(3) permits an ALJ to consider how effectively medication manages a claimant’s symptoms.

Williams v. Saul · filed 2021-09-14(c)(3)

An ALJ properly considers whether medication is effective at managing a claimant’s symptoms. 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1529(c)(3), 416.929(c)(3).

Section 404.1529(c)(3)(iv) makes the effectiveness of medication relevant when evaluating the intensity and persistence of a claimant’s symptoms.

Smith II v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2022-11-18(c)(3)(iv)

However, the ALJ properly considered the effectiveness of Plaintiff’s treatment, as contemplated by the regulations, noting that “once his dosage of Modafinil was increased to 200 mg twice per day,” his narcolepsy improved.

Section 404.1529(c)(3)(iv) calls for consideration of how effectively medication relieves a claimant’s symptoms.

CARRIGG v. O'MALLEY · filed 2024-01-23(c)(3)(iv)

As described above, the ALJ also considered the efficacy of treatment for Plaintiff's headaches. See 20 C.F.R. § 404.1529(c)(3)(iv) (consideration of effectiveness of medication in relieving symptoms).

Section 404.1529(c)(3)(iv) permits an ALJ to consider the effectiveness of medication when evaluating a claimant’s symptoms.

GRIFFIN v. COMMISSIONER OF SOCIAL SECURITY · filed 2024-07-31(c)(3)(iv)

Moreover, Plaintiff’s improvement while on medication was a valid reason for the ALJ to give less weight to her subjective complaints. See 20 C.F.R. § 404.1529(c)(3)(iv).

Section 404.1529(c) requires an ALJ evaluating subjective symptoms to consider objective evidence, daily activities, symptom characteristics, aggravating factors, medication, treatment and relief measures, and resulting functional limitations, without discussing every detail related to every factor.

Turner v. Kijakazi · filed 2023-11-03(c)

In evaluating a claimant's subjective symptom allegations, an ALJ must consider several factors, including the objective medical evidence; the claimant's daily activities; the location, duration, frequency, and intensity of the claimant’s pain or other symptoms; precipitating and aggravating factors; type, dosage, effectiveness, and side effects of medication; treatment and other measures besides medication taken to relieve pain or other symptoms; and functional limitations due to pain or other symptoms. 20 C.F.R. § 404.1529(c); SSR 16-3p, 2017 WL 5180304, at *5, 7-8 (Oct. 25, 2017). “‘An ALJ need not discuss every detail in the record as it relates to every factor,’ but an ALJ may not ignore an entire line of evidence contrary to [their] ruling.”

Section 404.1529’s factors need not be discussed methodically when the ALJ acknowledges and examines them and gives valid reasons supported by the whole record.

Defluiter v. Social Security Administration Commissioner · filed 2024-02-09

The ALJ is not required to methodically discuss each factor if the ALJ acknowledges and examines these factors prior to discounting the claimant’s subjective allegations. See Lowe v. Apfel, 226 F.3d 969, 971-72 (8th Cir. 2000).

Section 404.1529(c)(3) requires symptom findings to be linked to record evidence but does not require a formal factor-by-factor recitation.

Lester v. Social Security Administration · filed 2024-03-27(c)(3)

The ALJ is not required to perform a “formalistic factor-by-factor recitation of the evidence[,]” Qualls v. Apfel, 206 F.3d 1368, 1372 (10th Cir. 2000), but simply “recit[ing] the factors” is insufficient.

Section 404.1529(c)(3) requires consideration of all available medical and nonmedical symptom evidence, including daily activities, symptom characteristics and triggers, medication, treatment, relief measures, and functional factors.

Bahadur · filed 2026-02-19(c)(3)

In doing so, the ALJ considers “all of the available evidence from . . . medical sources and nonmedical sources,” 20 C.F.R. § 404.1529(c)(1), including a plaintiff’s “daily activities”; “location, duration, frequency, and intensity” of pain; “[p]recipitating and aggravating factors”; the “type, dosage, effectiveness, and side effects of any medication”; “[t]reatment, other than medication,” that a plaintiff receives; “any” other “measures” a plaintiff uses to relieve pain, for example, “lying flat[,] . . . standing for 15 to 20 minutes every hour, sleeping on a board, etc.”; and “[o]ther factors concerning [a plaintiff’s] functional limitations and restrictions” due to pain or other symptoms,” id. §§ 404.1529(c)(3)(i)-(vii).

Subsections 404.1529(c)(3)(i)-(vii) direct consideration of daily activities, symptom characteristics, precipitating factors, medication, other treatment, relief measures, and functional restrictions when assessing symptom statements.

Cooper · filed 2026-03-02(c)(3)(i)-(vii)

When determining whether a claimant’s subjective statements are credible, the ALJ considers: “(1) the claimant’s daily activities; (2) the location, duration, frequency, and intensity of the claimant’s pain or other symptoms; (3) any precipitating and aggravating facts; (4) the type, dosage, effectiveness, and side effects of medication; (5) the claimant’s treatments other than medication; (6) any measures used to relieve pain; and (7) other factors concerning a claimant’s functional limitations and restrictions based on pain or other symptoms.” Raper, 89 F.4th at 1277 (citing 20 C.F.R. § 404.1529(c)(3)(i)–(vii)). ... Here, the ALJ’s assessment of Plaintiff’s pain and other symptoms is supported by substantial evidence.

Subsection 404.1529(c)(3) identifies relevant symptom factors including daily activities, symptom frequency and intensity, medication effectiveness, other treatment, and functional limitations.

Shaver v. Frank Bisignano, Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2026-03-03(c)(3)

Thus, to assist in the evaluation of a claimant’s subjective symptoms, the Social Security Regulations set forth seven factors that may be relevant to the assessment of the claimant’s alleged symptoms. ... 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1529(c)(3), 416.929(c)(3). ... He discussed these objective findings, coupled with Shaver’s activities of daily living, his testimony, and the fact that he improved with treatment.

Section 404.1529(c)(3) does not require an ALJ to discuss each listed symptom factor expressly when the decision otherwise sufficiently supports the symptom assessment.

Ramirez-Benitez · filed 2026-01-15(c)(3)

“An ALJ is not required to discuss each of the Avery factors in order to sufficiently support a credibility determination.”

Section 404.1529(c)(3) requires the ALJ’s symptom analysis to consider daily activities, symptom characteristics and triggers, medication, other treatment and relief measures, and other functional factors.

Welch · filed 2026-01-15(c)(3)

As part of the symptom analysis, required under Soc. Sec. R. 16-3p, 2017 WL 5180304, at *3 (October 25, 2017), the ALJ should consider the factors set forth in 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1529(c)(3), 416.929(c)(3), including: (i) daily activities; (ii) the location, duration, frequency, and intensity of pain or other symptoms; (iii) precipitating and aggravating factors; (iv) the type, dosage, effectiveness, and side effects of any medication the individual takes or has taken; (v) treatment for pain relief aside from medication; (vi) any other measures Claimant uses or has used to relieve pain or other symptoms; and (vii) any other factors concerning functional limitations. See Soc. Sec. R. 16-3p, 2017 WL 5180304, at *7-8.

Section 404.1529(c)(3) requires an ALJ evaluating subjective symptoms to consider objective evidence together with daily activities, symptom characteristics and triggers, medication, and other treatment or relief measures.

Kristin J. v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2026-01-15(c)(3)

Along with objective evidence, ALJs must consider a plaintiff’s daily activities; the location, duration, frequency, and intensity of pain; precipitating and aggravating factors; the type, dosage, and side effects of medication to alleviate symptoms; and any other treatment or measures used to relieve pain. 20 C.F.R. § 404.1529(c)(3).

Section 404.1529(c)(3)-(4) requires consideration of objective evidence, symptom characteristics, daily activities, aggravating factors, medication and treatment, relief measures, and conflicts between the claimant’s statements and the remaining evidence.

Jones · filed 2026-01-20(c)(3)-(4)

In evaluating the extent to which a claimant’s symptoms affect her capacity to perform basic work activities, the ALJ will consider (1) objective medical evidence, (2) the nature of a claimant’s symptoms, (3) the claimant’s daily activities, (4) precipitating and aggravating factors, (5) the effectiveness of medication, (6) treatment sought for relief of symptoms, (7) any measures the claimant takes to relieve symptoms, and (8) any conflicts between a claimant’s statements and the rest of the evidence. See 20 C.F.R. § 404.1529(c)(3), (4); SSR 16-3p at *4, *7–*8.

Section 404.1529(c)(3) directs an ALJ evaluating symptom intensity and persistence to consider objective evidence, subjective complaints, work history, medical and nonmedical information, daily activities, medication effectiveness, treatment, and other functional factors.

Grohl · filed 2026-01-21(c)(3)

In undertaking the second step analysis, an ALJ should consider objective medical evidence, a claimant’s subjective complaints, information about a claimant’s prior work record, and information from medical and non-medical sources. SSR 16-3p, 82 Fed. Reg. 49462, 49464-49466; 20 C.F.R. § 404.1529(c)(3). Factors relevant to a claimant’s symptoms include daily activities, types and effectiveness of medications, treatment received to address symptoms, and other factors concerning a claimant’s functional limitations and restrictions due to pain or other symptoms. SSR 16-3p, 82 Fed. Reg. at 49465-49466; 20 C.F.R. § 404.1529(c)(3).

Subsection 404.1529(c)(3) calls for consideration of objective evidence, subjective complaints, work history, source information, daily activities, medication, treatment, and functional restrictions, but an ALJ need discuss only the factors pertinent to the case.

Beal · filed 2026-02-06(c)(3)

In undertaking the second step analysis, an ALJ should consider the objective medical evidence, the claimant’s subjective complaints, information about the claimant’s prior work record, and information from medical and non-medical sources. SSR 16-3p, 82 Fed. Reg. 49462, 49464-49466; 20 C.F.R. § 404.1529(c)(3). Factors relevant to a claimant’s symptoms include daily activities, types and effectiveness of medications, treatment received to address symptoms, and other factors concerning a claimant’s functional limitations and restrictions due to pain or other symptoms. SSR 16-3p, 82 Fed. Reg. at 49465-49466; 20 C.F.R. § 404.1529(c)(3). An ALJ need not discuss all regulatory factors he considers, only those he finds pertinent to the case. SSR 16-3p, 82 Fed. Reg. 49462, 49467.

Subsection 404.1529(c)(3) directs consideration of daily activities, symptom characteristics, aggravating factors, medication, other treatment, relief measures, and functional restrictions when evaluating testimony about symptoms.

Kang · filed 2026-02-10(c)(3)

When evaluating a claimant’s testimony, the ALJ should consider: (1) the claimant’s daily activities; (2) the location, duration, frequency, and intensity of the claimant’s pain or other symptoms; (3) precipitating and aggravating factors; (4) the type, dosage, effectiveness, and side effects of any medication to alleviate pain or other symptoms; (5) treatment other than medication for relief of pain or other symptoms; (6) any measures a claimant uses to relieve pain or other symptoms; and (7) other factors concerning a claimant’s functional limitations and restrictions due to pain or other symptoms. 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1529(c)(3), 416.929(c)(3); Ross v. Comm’r of Soc. Sec., 794 F. App’x 858, 867 (11th Cir. 2019). ... In thoroughly summarizing the medical and other evidence of record, the ALJ considered Plaintiff’s daily activities, the location duration frequency and intensity of her pain, aggravating factors, her medications, and other treatments to relieve the pain.

Section 404.1529(c) requires an ALJ to consider medical evidence, claimant statements, source information, and other relevant record evidence, but the ALJ need not analyze every listed factor if the decision shows consideration of the pertinent evidence.

Thomas · filed 2026-02-11(c)

In evaluating a claimant's symptoms, the ALJ must look to medical evidence, statements by the claimant, other information provided by medical sources, and any other relevant evidence on the record. 20 C.F.R. § 404.1529(c); SSR 16-3p, 2017 WL 5180304. ... The ALJ need not analyze all seven factors but should show that she considered the relevant evidence. See Cross v. Comm'r of Soc. Sec., 373 F. Supp. 2d 724, 733 (N.D. Ohio 2005).

Section 404.1529(c)(3) requires consideration of all record evidence bearing on symptom limitations, including daily activities, symptom characteristics, aggravating factors, medication, treatment, relief measures, and other functional factors.

Veverka · filed 2025-12-12(c)(3)

In evaluating the limiting effects of the claimant’s symptoms, the ALJ must consider all evidence in the record including: daily activities; the location, duration, and frequency of the alleged symptoms; factors that precipitate and aggravate the symptoms; the type, dosage, effectiveness, and side effects of medication; treatment other than medication; other efforts made to alleviate the symptoms; and other factors regarding the claimant’s functional limitations. 20 C.F.R. § 404.1529(c)(3).

Section 404.1529(c)(3) requires an ALJ evaluating subjective symptoms to consider objective medical evidence together with other relevant evidence, including the regulation’s listed symptom factors.

NIGRO · filed 2025-12-16(c)(3)

In conducting this evaluation, an ALJ must consider the objective medical evidence as well as other evidence relevant to a claimant’s subjective symptoms. 20 C.F.R. § 404.1529(c)(3) (listing the following factors to consider: daily activities; the location, duration, frequency, and intensity of pain or other symptoms; precipitating and aggravating factors; the type, dosage, effectiveness, and side effects of any medication you take or have taken to alleviate pain or other symptoms; treatment, other than medication, currently received or have received for relief of pain or other symptoms; any measures currently used or have used to relieve pain or other symptoms; and other factors concerning your functional limitations and restrictions due to pain or other symptoms).

Section 404.1529(c)(3) does not require an ALJ to analyze all seven symptom factors and permits discussion of only the factors relevant to the alleged symptoms.

Skidmore · filed 2025-12-18(c)(3)

The ALJ is not required to analyze all seven factors and may discuss only those relevant to the alleged symptoms. See Cross v. Comm’r of Soc. Sec., 373 F. Supp. 2d 724, 733 (N.D. Ohio 2005).

Section 404.1529(c)(3) requires an RFC assessment to consider symptom characteristics, medication, treatment, relief measures, daily activities, and other functional limitations along with objective evidence.

Watts v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2023-09-14(c)(3)

In doing so, the ALJ considers evidence such as the claimant’s medical history; medical signs and laboratory findings; medical source statements; daily activities; evidence from attempts to work; lay evidence; recorded observations; the location, duration, frequency, and intensity of the claimant’s pain or other symptoms; the type, dosage, effectiveness, and side effects of any medication or other treatment the claimant takes or has taken to alleviate pain or other symptoms; treatment, other than medication, the claimant receives or has received for relief of pain or other symptoms; any measures the claimant uses or has used to relieve pain or symptoms; and any other factors concerning the claimant’s functional limitations and restrictions. 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1529(c)(3)(i)-(vii), 404.1545(a)(3), 416.929(c)(3)(i)-(vii), 416.945(a)(3); Social Security Ruling (“SSR”) 96-8p, 1996 WL 374184 (July 2, 1996); SSR 16-3p, 2017 WL 5180304 (Oct. 25, 2017).

Section 404.1529(c)(3) supplies seven potentially relevant factors for evaluating a claimant’s alleged symptoms.

Marshall · filed 2026-02-23(c)(3)

Thus, to assist in the evaluation of a claimant’s subjective symptoms, the Social Security Regulations set forth seven factors that may be relevant to the assessment of the claimant’s alleged symptoms.

Section 404.1529(c)(3) sets forth seven potentially relevant factors for assessing alleged symptoms.

Soto · filed 2026-03-17(c)(3)

Thus, to assist in the evaluation of a claimant’s subjective symptoms, the Social Security Regulations set forth seven factors that may be relevant to the assessment of the claimant’s alleged symptoms.

Section 404.1529(c) requires an ALJ to give specific, evidence-supported reasons for discounting a claimant’s reported symptoms.

Irving v. Social Security Administration · filed 2023-08-16(c)

However, the ALJ must explain “the link between the evidence and” consistency determination. Kepler, 68 F.3d at 391; see also 20 C.F.R. § 404.1529 (ALJ must provide “specific reasons . . . supported by the evidence in the case record”).

An ALJ must consider objective and other symptom evidence and articulate explicit adequate reasons for discounting subjective complaints.

Spires v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2023-09-14(c)(3)–(4)

When the ALJ discredits the claimant’s subjective complaints, the ALJ must articulate explicit and adequate reasons for doing so.

Section 404.1529 permits an ALJ to discount subjective complaints when they are inconsistent with the record as a whole.

Guilliams v. Jo Anne B. Barnhart · filed 2005-01-04

A claimant’s subjective complaints may be discounted if there are inconsistencies in the record as a whole.

An ALJ must give reasons for discounting a claimant’s symptom allegations as a whole, but need not address every alleged symptom separately.

Scearcy v. Social Security Administration, Commissioner of · filed 2022-04-22

The court does not intend to suggest here that an ALJ must explain a basis to discount each symptom alleged by a claimant, but she must provide reasons to discount the allegations as a whole. She did not do so here.

An error in discussing daily activities under section 404.1529(c) is harmless when the ALJ independently conducts a thorough medical-evidence evaluation and does not rely on those activities to discount the alleged symptoms.

Nitzke · filed 2026-03-09(c)

And, any error the ALJ may have made in evaluating Nitzke’s activities of daily living is harmless, as the ALJ provided a thorough evaluation of the medical evidence and did not rely on Nitzke’s activities in discounting her allegations.

Subsection 404.1529(c)(3) makes daily activities one factor among several in evaluating symptoms, and reliance on limited activities does not require remand when the ALJ adequately explains an overall analysis grounded in treatment, objective evidence, and other factors.

Donald W. v. Commissioner of the Social Security Administration · filed 2026-01-13(c)(3)

The social security regulations inform claimants that in evaluating subjective complaints, the Commissioner will consider the following relevant factors: (i) Your daily activities; (ii) The location, duration, frequency, and intensity of your pain or other symptoms; (iii) Precipitating and aggravating factors; (iv) The type, dosage, effectiveness, and side effects of any medication you take or have taken to alleviate your pain or other symptoms; (v) Treatment, other than medication, you receive or have received for relief of your pain or other symptoms; (vi) Any measures you use or have used to relieve your pain or other symptoms (e.g., lying flat on your back, standing for 15 to 20 minutes every hour, sleeping on a board, etc.); and (vii) Other factors concerning your functional limitations and restrictions due to pain or other symptoms. 20 C.F.R. § 404.1529(c)(3). ... Plaintiff’s daily activities were but one factor in the overall analysis.

Section 404.1529 requires a two-step assessment of symptom-producing impairments and consistency, including conflicts between a claimant’s statements and the rest of the evidence.

Onder v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2023-09-26(a), (c)(4)

When crafting a claimant’s RFC, an ALJ must follow a two-step sequential process to determine whether a claimant’s symptoms can be accepted as consistent with objective medical evidence and other evidence. ... The ALJ must also consider “whether there are any inconsistencies in the evidence and the extent to which there are any conflicts between [a claimant’s] statements and the rest of the evidence . . . “ 20 C.F.R. § 404.1529(c)(4).

Section 404.1529(c)(4) permits an ALJ to decline to accept symptom testimony without question when articulated record-based reasons show the alleged intensity, persistence, and limiting effects are inconsistent.

SOTO v. COMMISSIONER OF SOCIAL SECURITY · filed 2023-09-27(c)(4)

While this testimony was certainly relevant, an ALJ is not under any obligation to simply accept what the claimant said without question. See 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1529(c)(4), 416.929(c)(4); Chandler v. Comm’r of Soc. Sec., 667 F.3d 356, 363 (3d Cir. 2011). ... The Court finds such deference is warranted in this case, as the ALJ noted that the reports in the record regarding the frequency and severity of Plaintiff’s headaches did not cause disabling limitation and that Plaintiff’s statements concerning the intensity, persistence, and limiting effects of his migraines were not persuasive of disability based upon the record.

Section 404.1529(c)(3)(i) permits consideration of work and daily activities when they contradict alleged limitations, provided the ALJ does not give them undue weight and considers them with treatment notes and objective evidence.

Herr v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2023-12-20(c)(3)(i)

The ALJ did not place undue weight on Plaintiff’s activities; the ALJ properly considered them along with the treatment notes and the objective medical record.

Under § 404.1529, daily activities do not necessarily establish an ability to work, but activities demanding greater physical and mental functioning than the claimant alleges may support finding those allegations inconsistent with the record.

Raper v. Social Security Administration, Commissioner · filed 2025-08-27(c)(3)(i), (c)(4)

Raper’s own testimony demonstrates that she retained a greater ability to sit, stand, twist, bend, and react than she alleged as evidenced by her babysitting, handling her dog, driving, etc. Though some of these, like playing on her phone, can be short in nature, many of these everyday activities require more extensive physical and mental abilities than Raper’s alleged limitations would permit and therefore are in direct conflict with the record.

Section 404.1529(c)(4) allows an ALJ to consider conflicts between a claimant’s symptom statements and other evidence when evaluating those symptoms.

Anderson v. Colvin · filed 2019-05-13(c)(4)

An ALJ may discount a claimant’s testimony based on conflicts between that testimony and other evidence, such as medical evaluations and the claimant’s prior reports to his physicians.

An ALJ may discount a claimant’s statements about symptoms when they conflict with other evidence in the record.

Luthy v. Commissioner, Social Security Administration · filed 2020-11-25(c)(4)

The ALJ properly found that these inconsistencies “between [plaintiff’s] statements and the rest of the evidence” warranted finding plaintiff’s testimony less credible. See 20 C.F.R. § 404.1529(c)(4).

Section 404.1529(c) requires consideration of the entire record and listed symptom factors and permits rejection of subjective symptoms only for explicit and adequate reasons.

Calhoun v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2023-09-18(c)(1)-(3)

In evaluating the intensity and persistence of a claimant’s symptoms, the ALJ considers the entire record, including the objective medical evidence, the claimant’s history, and statements of the claimant and [his or] her doctors. ... To reject the claimant’s assertions of subjective symptoms, “explicit and adequate reasons” must be articulated by the ALJ. ... The ALJ did not err in arriving at this conclusion.

Section 404.1529(c) requires consideration of the entire record and enumerated symptom factors and permits discounting allegations when explicit adequate reasons have substantial evidentiary support.

Velazquez v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2023-09-22(c)(1)-(3)

In evaluating the intensity and persistence of a claimant’s symptoms, the ALJ considers the entire record, including the objective medical evidence, the claimant’s history, and statements of the claimant and [his or] her doctors. ... To reject the claimant’s assertions of subjective symptoms, “explicit and adequate reasons” must be articulated by the ALJ. ... But, the ALJ adequately complied with the applicable authority in considering the various factors, and the ALJ’s reasons for finding Plaintiff’s allegations are not entirely consistent are accurate and supported by substantial evidence.

Section 404.1529(c) requires an ALJ to evaluate symptom intensity and persistence from all evidence, including daily activities, symptom characteristics, and treatment, and to explain whether statements are consistent with the record.

Gonzalez v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2024-02-08(c)(1), (c)(4)

In doing so, the ALJ considers all available evidence, including objective medical evidence, medical opinions, information about the claimant’s prior work, the claimant’s statements about her symptoms, the claimant’s daily activities, the frequency and intensity of the claimant’s pain or other symptoms, the medications the claimant takes to alleviate pain or other symptoms, and the type of treatment the claimant receives. 20 C.F.R. § 404.1529(c); see Douglas v. Comm’r, Soc. Sec. Admin., 832 F. App’x 650, 657 (11th Cir. 2020).

Section 404.1529(c) permits discrediting pain testimony based on imaging, treating records, and conservative treatment when the ALJ clearly articulates adequate reasons supported by substantial evidence.

Hayes v. Social Security Administration, Commissioner · filed 2024-03-06(c)

Together, these were appropriate grounds for discrediting ... Hayes’s testimony regarding his pain.

Section 404.1529(c)(3)–(4) requires the seven symptom factors to be evaluated with the other record evidence and requires explicit, adequate reasons for rejecting subjective assertions.

Perez v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2024-03-13(c)(3)–(4)

The factors must be considered “in relation to other evidence in the record and whether the claimant’s statements conflict with other evidence.” Raper, 89 F.4th at 1277 (citation omitted); see 20 C.F.R. § 404.1529(c)(4). To reject the claimant’s assertions of subjective symptoms, “explicit and adequate reasons” must be articulated by the ALJ.

Section 404.1529(c)(3)–(4) requires the seven symptom factors to be evaluated against other record evidence and requires explicit, adequate reasons for rejecting subjective assertions.

Pantella v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2024-03-27(c)(3)–(4)

The factors must be considered “in relation to other evidence in the record and whether the claimant’s statements conflict with other evidence.” Raper, 89 F.4th at 1277 (citation omitted); see 20 C.F.R. § 404.1529(c)(4). To reject the claimant’s assertions of subjective symptoms, “explicit and adequate reasons” must be articulated by the ALJ.

Section 404.1529 requires explicit and adequate reasons grounded in both objective and subjective evidence.

Ewing v. Social Security Administration, Commissioner · filed 2024-03-29(c)

The ALJ’s detailed summary of the record shows that the ALJ did not reject Ewing’s testimony only because it was not substantiated by the available medical evidence (see 20 C.F.R § 404.1529(c)(2)), and instead considered all of the evidence, objective and subjective (see 20 C.F.R. § 404.1529).

Section 404.1529 permits rejection of symptom testimony when the ALJ gives clear and convincing reasons based on the whole record.

(SS) Gutierrez v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2024-07-02

The ALJ provided clear and convincing reasons to reject Plaintiff’s symptom testimony.

Sections 404.1529(c)(3)–(4) require explicit and adequate reasons when discrediting subjective symptom allegations.

Roberts v. Social Security Administration, Commissioner · filed 2024-07-11(c)(3)–(4)

If the ALJ discredits the claimant’s allegations regarding her subjective symptoms, the ALJ “must clearly articulate explicit and adequate reasons for doing so.” Id.

Sections 404.1529(b)–(c) require a two-step process and explicit, adequate reasons when subjective complaints are discounted.

Griffin v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2024-08-07(b)–(c)

When the ALJ discredits the claimant’s subjective complaints, the ALJ must articulate explicit and adequate reasons for doing so.