20 C.F.R. § 404.1529

Section 404.1529 requires the ALJ to consider a claimant’s symptoms, including pain, and whether they are consistent with the objective medical evidence and other evidence.

Leonard v. Saul · filed 2019-07-24

As an initial matter, the court rejects Donald’s assertion that the ALJ applied an improper standard and failed to follow the regulatory requirements in his symptom assessment. The ALJ began the RFC determination by reciting the standard for a finding of disability under 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1529, 416.929, and SSR 96-4, 1996 WL 374187 (July 2, 1996), which requires the ALJ to consider all of a claimant’s “symptoms, including pain, and the extent to which [his] symptoms can reasonably be accepted as consistent with the objective medical evidence and other evidence.”

Section 404.1529 requires consideration of a claimant’s symptoms, even when the underlying diagnosis is uncertain.

Thomas v. Commissioner of Social Security Administration · filed 2020-03-02

The ALJ appears to be attempting to show that the etiology of Plaintiff’s symptom may ... not be Chron’s disease, but it is the symptoms, not the underlying diagnosis that determines whether a claimant is disabled. See 20 C.F.R. § 404.1529.

Section 404.1529(c) requires an ALJ to consider specified evidence and factors beyond objective medical evidence when assessing a claimant’s symptom statements.

Iseminger v. Kijakazi · filed 2022-06-13(c)

In recognition of the fact that an individual’s symptoms can sometimes suggest a greater level of severity of impairment than can be shown by the objective medical evidence alone, 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1529(c) and 416.929(c) describe the kinds of evidence, including the factors below, that the ALJ must consider in addition to the objective medical evidence when assessing the credibility of an individual’s statements: 1. Daily activities; 2. The location, duration, frequency, and intensity of ... pain or other symptoms; 3. Factors that precipitate and aggravate the symptoms; 4. The type, dosage, effectiveness, and side effects of any medication an individual takes or has taken to alleviate pain or other ... symptoms; 5. Treatment, other than medication, an individual receives or has received for relief of pain or other symptoms; 6. Any measures other than treatment an individual uses or has used to relieve pain or ... other symptoms (e.g., lying flat on his or her back, standing for 15 to 20 minutes every hour, or sleeping on a board); and 7. Any other factors concerning an individual’s functional limitations and restrictions due to pain or other symptoms. SSR 16-3P, 2017 WL 5180304.

Section 404.1529 instructs an ALJ to consider objective medical evidence, medical history, doctors’ statements, functional limitations, aggravating factors, treatment methods, and the claimant’s activities when assessing pain complaints.

Redeker v. Chater · filed 1996-01-19

In assessing complaints of pain, Avery and 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1529 and 416.929 instruct the ALJ to consider the objective medical evidence, medical history, doctor’s statements, functional limitations, aggravating factors, methods of treatment, and claimant’s activities.

Section 404.1529 requires the ALJ to evaluate symptoms, including pain, against objective and other evidence and requires medical evidence that the impairment could reasonably produce the alleged pain.

Weiler v. Shalala · filed 1996-03-21

In determining whether a claimant is disabled, the ALJ must consider all of the claimant’s symptoms, including pain, and the extent to which these symptoms can reasonably be accepted as consistent with the objective medical evidence as well as other evidence in the record. See 20 C.F.R. § 404.1529; Avery v. Secretary of Health and Human Services, 797 F.2d 19, 23 (1st Cir.1986). A claimant’s statements about her pain or other symptoms will not alone establish disability. 20 C.F.R. § 404.1529(a). There must also be medical evidence to show that the claimant’s impairment(s) could reasonably be expected to produce the pain alleged. 20 C.F.R. § 404.1529(a).

Section 404.1529(c)(3) requires an ALJ to consider factors such as daily activities, medication, treatment, and other relief measures when assessing excess pain testimony.

Perez v. Chater · filed 1997-05-02(c)(3)

An ALJ is required to consider other factors, aside from medical opinions, in assessing excess pain testimony. Social Security Ruling 88-13. These include daily activities, the descriptions of intensity and frequency of pain, the type and dosage of any medications taken, the treatment received (other than medication) for relief of pain, and other relief measures employed. See 20 C.F.R. § 404.1529(c)(3) (1996).

Section 404.1529 requires consideration of a claimant's subjective symptoms, including pain, in evaluating disability.

Urtz v. Callahan · filed 1997-05-22

The ALJ considered the plaintiffs subjective claims of pain as required by 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1529, 416.929. The plaintiff complained that she experiences headaches including pain in her back, shoulders, elbows, ankles, right leg, and arms. (Tr. 26, 41). She further testified that she cannot stand or sit for long periods of time. (Tr. 49). However, the ALJ found these complaints to be exaggerated, and therefore, concluded that she was not reliable in reporting her symptoms. (Tr. 26). ... These two factors lead the Court to the conclusion that there are legitimate reasons to support the ALJ’s rejection of the plaintiffs subjective complaints of pain.

Section 404.1529(c)(3) requires considering both subjective and objective medical evidence when determining disability, without automatically treating either as superior.

Laird v. Stilwill · filed 1997-06-12(c)(3)

The above quoted material appears to mean that, ceteris paribus, both subjective and objective medical evidence should be considered when determining disability and neither type of evidence should necessarily trump the other. ... For all intents and purposes, therefore, the Eighth Circuit’s subsequent interpretations of Polaski will also control this court’s interpretation of 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1529(c)(3) and 416.929(c)(3) (1996).

Section 404.1529 governs how symptoms, including pain, are evaluated when determining disability.

Laird v. Stilwill · filed 1997-10-25(a)

These regulations twice state that subjective pain evidence is evaluated on the basis of the extent to which it is consistent with objective evidence, that is, whether, based on objective evidence, the impairment could reasonably be expected to produce the pain or other symptoms alleged. Such a standard is irreconcilable with the Polaski standard, which specifically eschews any correlation between the extent of subjective pain and objective evidence that the impairment could cause that degree of pain.

Section 404.1529 requires medical signs and laboratory findings showing an impairment that could produce claimed symptoms, considered with other evidence, before symptoms can establish disability.

Tejada v. Callahan · filed 1998-02-02(a)

The Commissioner will consider statements about a claimant’s pain or other symptoms, but they alone will not establish that the claimant is disabled. Rather, there must be medical signs and laboratory findings which show that [the claimant has] a medical impairment(s) which could alleged and which, when considered with , all of the other evidence ... would lead to . a conclusion that [the claimant] is disabled.

Section 404.1529 requires evaluating pain and other symptoms using all available evidence, including medical history, daily activities, treatment, work efforts, and functional limitations.

Borrero v. Callahan · filed 1998-03-30

In evaluating subjective symptoms such as pain, a claimant must first demonstrate the existence of a medically determinable impairment that could reasonably be expected to produce the symptom. After such an impairment has been identified, the intensity and persistence of the claimant’s pain are evaluated based on all available evidence. The claimed pain will not be rejected simply because the objective medical evidence does not support the claim. Other factors which will be considered include the claimant’s medical history, diagnosis, daily activities, prescribed treatments, efforts to work and any functional limitations or restrictions caused by the pain. 20 C.F.R. § 404.1529.

Section 404.1529 requires considering a claimant’s symptom statements and assessing symptom intensity and persistence after a medically determinable impairment is established.

Caviness v. Apfel · filed 1998-04-22

The Social Security regulations provide that in making the disability determination, the Commissioner will consider a claimant’s statements about his or her symptoms and how they affect the claimant’s daily life and ability to work. 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1529(a), 416.929(a). .Subjective allegations of disabling symptoms alone cannot support a finding of disability, however. Id. The Social Security regulations set forth a two-part test for determining whether complaints of pain contribute to a finding of disability. First, the claimant must provide objective medical evidence of a medically determinable impairment or combination of impairments that reasonably could be expected to produce the symptoms alleged. 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1529(a) & (b), 416.929(a) & (b). Second, once the ALJ has found an impairment that reasonably could cause the symptoms alleged, the ALJ must consider the intensity and persistence of those symptoms. 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1529(c), 416.929(c).

Section 404.1529 requires evaluating pain and other symptoms using medical and other evidence, including testimony about daily activities, restrictions, medication, and aggravating factors.

Janice S. ESTOK, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Kenneth S. APFEL, Commissioner of Social Security, Defendant-Appellee · filed 1998-08-05

Because the intensity or persistence of the pain was unsubstantiated, the ALJ properly examined and weighed all the evidence, including observations by treating and examining physicians and third-party testimony. He also reviewed the claimant’s testimony about her pain and her daily activities, functional restrictions, pain medication taken, and aggravating or precipitating factors to evaluate the degree to which the claimant’s impairment affected her ability to work. See Herron v. Shalala, 19 F.3d 329 (7th Cir.1994); 20 C.F.R. § 404.1529 (1993); Social Security Ruling 88-13.

Section 404.1529 requires an administrative law judge to evaluate subjective pain by considering its characteristics, treatment, and effects on the claimant’s activities.

Barrett v. Apfel · filed 1999-02-23

An administrative law judge must assess a claimant’s assertions of subjective pain in accord with both Avery and federal regulations, 20 C.F.R. § 404.1529. Specifically, the administrative law judge must consider, among other things, the location, intensity and duration of the pain, whether there are any aggravating factors, the effect of any pain medication, the effectiveness of any treatment beyond medication, and the claimant’s functional restrictions and daily activities.

Section 404.1529 requires the ALJ to evaluate how pain affects the claimant’s ability to function.

Gray v. Chater · filed 1995-10-06

While it is incumbent upon the ALJ to evaluate the effect of pain on the claimant’s ability to function, see 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1529, 416.929; see also Martin, 1994 WL 263818, at *5, here, the ALJ considered the pain to which the plaintiff testified; indeed, the ALJ’s decision explicitly considered the plaintiffs description of his symptoms in accordance with the regulations and credited it.

Section 404.1529(a) requires consideration of a claimant's pain and symptom statements, but they must be supported by medical and clinical findings before establishing disability.

Gonzalez v. Apfel · filed 1999-08-25(a)

In addition, the Commissioner will consider a claimants statements regarding pain and other symptoms, but these factors alone will not establish disability. See 20 C.F.R. § 404.1529(a). There must exist medical and clinical findings that support the conclusion that the claimant suffers from a medical impairment which could “reasonably be expected to produce the pain or other symptoms alleged and which, when considered with all other evidence ... would lead to the conclusion that [the claimant is] disabled.”

Section 404.1529 requires a two step process for evaluating subjective complaints of pain and considering their effect on the claimant’s ability to work.

Ketcher v. Apfel · filed 1999-08-27

In considering a claimant’s subjective complaints, an ALJ is directed by 20 C.F.R. § 404.1529 to engage in a two step process. The ALJ must first determine if the alleged pain could reasonably result from the medically determined impairment. See 20 C.F.R. § 404.1529(b). If it is determined that the claimant’s allegations of pain are reasonable, the ALJ proceeds to step two where he must determine the effect of the pain on the claimant’s ability to work. In doing so, the ALJ must consider all the available evidence of the pain itself, including medical history and signs, laboratory findings, and statements from the claimant and his doctors. See 20 C.F.R. § 404.1529(c)(2).

Section 404.1529 requires the ALJ to evaluate subjective symptoms by considering record evidence and explaining the weight given to related statements.

Gallivan v. Apfel · filed 2000-03-28

Although the ALJ’s decision contains a discussion of the medical evidence and a summary of Gallivan’s subjective complaints, the decision does not sufficiently link his credibility finding to the evidence in the record, and fails to identify the weight, if any, afforded the affidavits of plaintiffs daughter and daughter-in-law concerning plaintiffs pain. See 20 C.F.R. § 404.1529. The ALJ did not state if he placed any weight on the affidavits of plaintiffs daughter, Karen Jenkins, or plaintiffs daughter-in-law, Stacy Gallivan, regarding plaintiffs impairments, pain, and their impact on plaintiff.

Section 404.1529 establishes a two-step process for evaluating whether a person is disabled by pain and other symptoms.

Huntington v. Apfel · filed 2000-06-22

Where a claimant alleges disability due to pain, the ALJ must apply the Commissioner’s regulations, 20 C.F.R. § 404.1529 and § 416.929, which establish a two-step process for evaluating whether a person is disabled by pain and other symptoms.

Section 404.1529 requires consideration of whether a medical impairment could reasonably be expected to produce the claimant's alleged pain.

Cottrill v. Apfel · filed 2000-06-27

Given the evidence, the ALJ should have ■ considered whether plaintiff had established “the existence of a medical impairment which could reasonably be expected to produce the actual pain in the amount and degree alleged by [her].” ... see 20 C.F.R. § 404.1529 (establishing procedure for evaluating whether person is disabled by pain).

Section 404.1529 requires consideration of medical history, diagnoses, daily activities, treatments, work efforts, and functional limitations when evaluating pain and other symptoms.

Bellamy v. Apfel · filed 2000-08-07

Other factors that should be considered include the plaintiffs medical history, diagnoses, daily activities, prescribed treatments, efforts to work and any functional limitations or restrictions caused by the pain. 20 C.F.R. § 404.1529; Gonzalez v. Apfel, 23 F.Supp.2d 179, 191-92 (D.Conn.1998). ... Based upon our careful examination of the entire record, including the medical evidence, the functional assessments and the consultative examinations, as well as plaintiffs work history and history of medical treatment, we find substantial evidence to support the ALJ’s credibility determination as to plaintiffs subjective complaints of pain.

Section 404.1529 requires an ALJ to evaluate pain and other symptoms by considering their severity, functional effects, and relevant evidence.

Lovely v. SSA · filed 2000-10-20(a), (b), and (c)(3)

When a claimant alleges disability due to pain, in assessing the claimant's residual functional capacity, the ALJ must first determine whether the claimant has a medically determinable ... impairment that is reasonably likely to produce the pain claimed. ... If so, the ALJ must assess the severity of the pain and the extent to which pain impedes the claimant's ability to work by considering all of the pertinent evidence of record including "claimant's statements, opinions of treating physicians, reports of claimant's activities and claimant's course of treatment." ... The social security regulations, however, recognize that pain may indicate a more severe impairment than can be documented by medical evidence.

Statements about pain or other symptoms alone do not establish disability.

Brown v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2001-01-12(a)

An individual’s statements as to “pain or other symptoms will not alone establish that [he is] disabled.” 20 C.F.R. § 404.1529(a).

Section 404.1529 requires objective medical evidence to substantiate pain allegations and consideration of pain intensity, persistence, and all available evidence when evaluating work limitations.

Porter v. Apfel · filed 2001-02-28(a), (c)(1)

Statements of pain are not enough to establish disability; there must be objective medical evidence to substantiate the claim. 20 C.F.R. § 404.1529(a). Further, intensity and persistence of pain is evaluated in determining the extent that the capacity to work is limited. 20 C.F.R. § 404.1529(c)(1)'. All available evidence is considered, including objective medical evidence, statements from the claimant, and inconsistencies in the evidence. Id.

The section requires an administrative law judge to consider related symptoms, including pain, when evaluating a claimant’s residual functional capacity.

Musto v. Halter · filed 2001-03-23(d)(4)

The regulations establish that in cases such as Musto’s, in which a claimant has a medically-determinable severe physical impairment that is of less severity than the impairments described in Appendix 1 of subpart P of part 404 of the regulations, “the administrative law judge must consider the impact of related symptoms, including pain, on the claimant’s residual functional capacity.” Bazile, 113 F.Supp.2d at 185 (citing 20 C.F.R. § 404.1529[d][4]). Thus, the administrative law judge evaluates the claimant’s subjective complaints of pain and determines what probative weight to give to them.

Section 404.1529 requires an ALJ to evaluate a claimant’s subjective symptoms and related evidence when deciding disability.

Roberts v. Massanari · filed 2001-05-24

The ALJ’s consideration of the subjective aspects of plaintiffs complaints comported with the regulations at 20 C.F.R. § 404.1529 and § 416.929 (2000); see also Social Security Ruling (SSR) 96-7p.

Section 404.1529 requires evaluating symptom intensity and persistence to determine how symptoms limit work capacity, using factors including daily activities and treatment.

Makuch v. Halter · filed 2001-10-31(c)(3)

With this evidence in hand, the Agency is required to “evaluate the intensity and persistence of [the claimant’s] symptoms so that [it] can determine how [the] symptoms limit [the] ... capacity for work.” 20 C.F.R. § 404.1529(c). The regulations recognize that a person’s symptoms may be more severe than the objective medical evidence suggests. See 20 C.F.R. § 404.1529(c)(3). Therefore, the regulations provide six factors (known as the Avery factors) that will be considered when an applicant alleges pain.

Section 404.1529 requires medical evidence of an impairment that could produce the alleged symptoms and says symptoms alone do not establish disability.

Campbell v. Barnhart · filed 2001-11-30(a)

That is not to say that a claimant’s subjective testimony by itself can establish disability. See 20 C.F.R. § 404.1529(a). “[Statements about your pain or other symptoms will not alone establish that you are disabled; there must be medical signs and laboratory findings which show that you have a medical impairment ... which could reasonably be expected to produce the pain or other symptoms alleged and which, when considered with all of the other evidence (including statements about the intensity and persistence of your pain or other symptoms which may reasonably be accepted as consistent with medical signs and laboratory findings), would lead to a conclusion that you are disabled.” Id. (emphasis added).

Section 404.1529 requires objective evidence of an impairment capable of producing the alleged symptoms and requires evaluation of symptom intensity and persistence using all relevant information.

Jackson v. Barnhart · filed 2002-04-02(a), (c)

Under the regulations, pain is a symptom and its relevance is governed by 20 C.F.R. § 404.1529. As a threshold matter, objective medical evidence must exist that demonstrates that the claimant has a medical impairment “which could reasonably be expected to produce the pain or other symptoms alleged.” 20 C.F.R. § 404.1529(a). If the medical evidence shows such an impairment, then the ALJ must evaluate the intensity and persistence of the claimant’s symptoms so that the ALJ can determine how the claimant’s symptoms limit his or her capacity for work. See 20 C.F.R. § 404.1529(c). ... The ALJ may not reject a claimant’s statements about the intensity and persistence of his or her symptoms or about the effect of the symptoms on his or her ability to work solely because the available objective medical evidence does not substantiate the claimant’s statements. See 20 C.F.R. § 404.1529. All information submitted by the claimant must be considered, including her statements and evidence submitted by the claimant’s treating, examining and consulting physicians. See id.

Section 404.1529 requires the ALJ to consider a claimant’s subjective testimony about symptoms.

Comer v. Massanari · filed 2002-05-16

The ALJ is required to consider the subjective testimony of the claimant. Smolen v. Chafer, 80 F.3d 1273, 1281-82 (9th Cir.1996) (noting that a claimant need not produce evidence of pain other than her own subjective testimony, nor must she present objective medical evidence of a causal relationship between the impairment and the type of symptom so long as such is a “reasonable inference”); 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1529, 416.929.

Section 404.1529(c)(3) requires consideration of daily activities, medication, and other treatment when evaluating a claimant’s symptoms.

Gagnon v. Barnhart · filed 2002-07-01(c)(3)

Because the ALJ determined that the objective medical evidence did not fully support plaintiffs subjective complaints, the ALJ was required to consider other factors in evaluating those complaints, such as plaintiffs daily activities, medications taken for relief of pain and other symptoms, and other treatment or measures taken to relieve the pain and other symptoms. 20 C.F.R. § 404.1529(c)(3); ... This he did.

Section 404.1529 requires evidence of a condition that could reasonably produce pain, but does not require objective evidence of pain itself.

Pachilis v. Barnhart · filed 2003-05-30

Objective evidence of pain is not required; rather, there must be “objective evidence of some condition that could reasonably produce pain ...” Green v. Schweiker, 749 F.2d 1066, 1071 (3d Cir.1984); accord 20 C.F.R. § 404.1529, and “[w]here medical evidence does support a claimant’s complaints of pain, the complaints should then be given ‘great weight’ and may not be disregarded unless there exists contrary medical evidence.” Mason, 994 F.2d at 1067-68.

Section 404.1529 requires consideration of objective medical evidence and specified factors when evaluating claimed symptoms and pain.

Vitale v. Apfel · filed 1999-05-13(b), (c)(2), and (c)(3)

As the Commissioner argues, subjective symptomatology cannot, by itself, establish disability; rather, plaintiff must demonstrate by medical and laboratory findings the existence of an underlying condition that can reasonably be expected to produce the symptomatology alleged. See 20 C.F.R. § 404.1529(b). If a medically determinable impairment exists, objective medical evidence, such as evidence of reduction of joint motion, muscle spasm, or sensory and motor disruption, must be considered in determining whether disability exists. Id. § 404.1529(c)(2). Where a claim of pain is not fully supported by the record, consideration is given to such factors as the frequency and duration of pain, precipitating and aggravating factors, the effect of medication, pain treatment, functional restrictions, and the claimant’s daily activities. Id. § 404.1529(c)(3).

Section 404.1529 requires an ALJ to consider subjective complaints of pain, weigh testimony supported by objective evidence considerably, consider specified factors when the testimony is not fully supported, and explain with sufficient particularity the reasons for rejecting it.

Pardee v. Astrue · filed 2009-07-07(a), (c)(3)(i)-(vi), (c)(4)

An ALJ must take into account subjective complaints of pain in making the five step disability analysis. 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1529(a), (d), 416.929(a), (d). When examining the issue of pain, however, the ALJ is not required to blindly accept the subjective testimony of a claimant. ... Rather, an ALJ retains the discretion to evaluate a claimant’s subjective testimony, including testimony concerning pain. ... In deciding how to exercise that discretion the ALJ must consider a variety of factors which ordinarily would be relevant on the issue of credibility in any context, including the claimant’s credibility, his or her motivation, and the medical evidence in the record. ... In doing so, the ALJ must reach an independent judgment concerning the actual extent of pain suffered and its impact upon the claimant’s ability to work. ... When such testimony is consistent with and supported by objective clinical evidence demonstrating that claimant has a medical impairment which one could reasonably anticipate would produce such pain, it is entitled to considerable weight. ... If the claimant’s testimony concerning the intensity, persistence or functional limitations associated with his or her pain is not fully supported by clinical evidence, however, then the ALJ must consider additional factors in order to assess that testimony, including: 1) daily activities; 2) location, duration, frequency and intensity of any symptoms; 3) precipitating and aggravating factors; 4) type, dosage, effectiveness and side effects of any medications taken; 5) other treatment received; and 6) other measures taken to relieve symptoms. 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1529(c)(3)(i)-(vi), 416.929(c)(3)(i)-(vi). ... After considering plaintiffs subjective testimony, the objective medical evidence, and any other factors deemed relevant, the ALJ may accept or reject claimant’s subjective testimony. ... If such testimony is rejected, however, the ALJ must explicitly state the basis for doing so with sufficient particularity to enable a reviewing court to determine whether those reasons for disbelief were legitimate, and whether the determination is supported by substantial evidence. ... Where the ALJ’s findings are supported by substantial evidence, the decision to discount subjective testimony may not be disturbed on court review.

Section 404.1529(d)(4) permits an ALJ to evaluate a claimant’s credibility regarding subjective complaints when determining residual functional capacity.

Brank v. Astrue · filed 2009-07-22(d)(4)

In determining a claimant’s RFC, the ALJ is empowered to evaluate the credibility of witnesses regarding the claimant’s subjective complaints.

Section 404.1529(c) requires an ALJ evaluating subjective symptoms to consider the relevant evidence and make a reasonable credibility determination supported by substantial evidence.

Dennis v. Astrue · filed 2009-07-29(c)

The Magistrate Judge’s report is hereby adopted, and its findings and conclusions are incorporated by reference herein. ... 20 C.F.R. § 404.1529(c) and SSR 96-7p describe the kinds of evidence that an ALJ should consider when determining the credibility of an individual’s statements. “[Wlhile credibility determinations regarding subjective complaints rest with the ALJ, those determinations must be reasonable and supported by substantial evidence.” ... The magistrate judge concludes that the reasons offered by the ALJ for discrediting the plaintiffs testimony of disabling subjective symptoms prior to December 31, 2001, are unpersuasive for the following reasons: ... 1. The letters from Laura Cooper and Stephanie McCain constitute “corroborating proof’ of the plaintiffs claim. The ALJ’s decision fails to reflect that she gave this lay evidence any “perceptible weight.” ... 3. The ALJ’s remaining bases are little more than unpersuasive attempts to turn the fact that the plaintiff is the mother of three children, whom she chose not to abandon, into bases for disbelieving her testimony. ... The ALJ’s credibility assessment was inadequate.

Section 404.1529(a) bars finding a claimant disabled solely on subjective complaints and requires medical documentation showing an impairment that could reasonably produce the alleged pain or symptoms.

Morrison v. Astrue · filed 2009-10-28(a)

The ALJ may not find an individual disabled based solely on his or her subjective complaints alone. 20 C.F.R. § 404.1529(a). Rather, those complaints must be supported by medical documentation to show that the individual has an impairment that could reasonably produce the alleged pain or symptoms.

Section 404.1529(c) requires an ALJ evaluating a claimant’s symptoms to consider pain level, medications, treatment, daily activities, and limitations.

Kittelson v. Astrue · filed 2010-01-25(c)

In making a credibility determination, the ALJ must consider the claimant’s pain level, medications, treatment, daily activities, and limitations, 20 C.F.R. § 404.1529(c), and must justify his finding with “specific reasons supported by the record.”

Section 404.1529(c) requires an ALJ assessing a claimant’s subjective symptoms to consider listed credibility factors, but does not require explicit discussion of each factor.

Routh v. Astrue · filed 2010-03-18(c)

However, an ALJ need only acknowledge and consider these factors, and need not explicitly discuss each one. ... Here, the ALJ stated she was considering Plaintiffs statements and testimony based on the requirements of § 404.1529 and SSR 96-7p (Tr. 46, 49), explicitly discredited Plaintiffs credibility (Tr. 47, 49), and gave several reasons for doing so (Tr. 47-49).

Section 404.1529 instructs an ALJ evaluating subjective symptoms not to reject testimony solely for lack of objective medical evidence and to consider the claimant's statements, other evidence, inconsistencies, daily activities, symptom characteristics, medication effects, and treatment.

Robinson v. Astrue · filed 2010-02-19(c)(2)-(4), (c)(3)(i)-(iv)

The ALJ cannot discredit testimony as to the intensity or persistence of pain and fatigue solely based on the lack of objective medical evidence. See 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1529(c)(2), 416.929(c)(2); see also Moore, 405 F.3d at 1211-12 (noting that the “hallmark” of fibromyalgia is the lack of objective evidence, but holding that an ALJ does not err in finding a claimant not credible based on the inconsistencies between a claimant’s descriptions of her diverse daily activities and her claims of infirmity); Todd v. Heckler, 736 F.2d 641, 642 (11th Cir. 1984) (explaining that pain alone may be disabling and that it is improper for an ALJ to require objective medical evidence to support a claim of disabling pain). ... In reaching a conclusion regarding a claimant’s disability, the ALJ considers all of the evidence presented, including prior work records, the claimant’s statement about her symptoms, evidence submitted by a claimant’s treating or nontreating source, and observations by other persons. 20 C.F.R. § 404.1529(c)(3). Inconsistencies or conflicts between a claimant’s statements and the other evidence are also considered. Id. § 404.1529(c)(4); see also Dyer, 395 F.3d at 1212. ... The ALJ, when evaluating a claimant’s subjective symptoms, can also consider such things as: (1) the nature, location, onset, duration, frequency, radiation, and intensity of pain and other symptoms; (2) precipitating and aggravating factors; (3) adverse side-effects of medications, and (4) treatment or measures taken by the claimant for relief of symptoms. See 20 C.F.R. § 404.1529(c)(3)(i)-(iv); see also Swindle v. Sullivan, 914 F.2d 222, 226 (11th Cir. 1990) (holding that an ALJ’s determination on side effects was proper where the claimant did not complain about side effects nor did the record disclose any concerns about side effects by the doctors examining the claimant).

Section 404.1529 requires corroborating objective medical evidence before subjective complaints alone can support an award of disability insurance benefits.

Behling v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2010-03-16

While it is true that “subjective evidence of pain or disability testified to by the claimant” is relevant in evaluating a claim for disability insurance, Brown v. Apfel, 174 F.3d 59, 62 (2d Cir. 1999), appellant’s subjective complaints alone are not a basis for an award of disability insurance benefits in the absence of corroborating objective medical evidence. See 20 C.F.R. § 404.1529; Poupore v. Astrue, 566 F.3d 303, 307 (2d Cir. 2009) (per curiam).

Section 404.1529(c) provides the framework for evaluating the intensity, persistence, and functional effects of symptoms and their impact on a claimant’s ability to work.

Crane v. Astrue · filed 2010-03-17(c)

The framework for evaluating the intensity and persistence of symptoms and their functional effects is provided in 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1529(c) and 416.929(c). ... To be sure, an ALJ is required to do more than simply “recite[] the general factors he considered . . . [without] refer[ring] to any specific evidence.” ... So long as the ALJ sets forth the specific evidence he relies on in evaluating the claimant’s credibility, the dictates of Kepler are satisfied. ... The ALJ’s analysis meets this test. He spent more than two pages discussing factors such as Ms. Crane’s daily activities, her delay in seeking mental health treatment, her work and physical activities, and the improvements following her back surgery.

Section 404.1529(c)(3) requires an ALJ evaluating a claimant’s subjective symptoms to consider factors including daily activities, pain characteristics, medication, treatment, and measures used to relieve symptoms.

Leiter v. Commissioner of Social Security Administration · filed 2010-05-06(c)(3)

When evaluating a claimant’s subjective symptoms, the ALJ must consider the following factors: (i) the claimant’s “daily activities; (ii) the location, duration, frequency, and intensity of the [claimant’s] pain or other symptoms; (iii) [p]recipitating and aggravating factors; (iv) the type, dosage, effectiveness, and side effects of any medication the [claimant took] to alleviate pain or other symptoms; (v) treatment, other than medication, [the claimant] received for relief . . . of pain or other symptoms; and (vi) any measures the claimant personally used to relieve pain or other symptoms.” 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1529(c)(3) & 416.929(c)(3); see also Watson v. Heckler, 738 F.2d 1169, 1172 (11th Cir. 1984) (per curiam).

Section 404.1529(c)(3) requires the ALJ to consider specified factors, including daily activities, when evaluating a claimant’s subjective symptoms.

Leiter v. Commr. of Soc. Security · filed 2010-05-06(c)(3)

When evaluating a claimant’s subjective symptoms, the ALJ must consider the following factors: (i) the claimant’s “daily activities; (ii) the location, duration, frequency, and intensity of the [claimant’s] pain or other symptoms; (iii) [p]recipitating and aggravating factors; (iv) the type, dosage, effectiveness, and side effects of any medication the [claimant took] to alleviate pain or other symptoms; (v) treatment, other than medication, [the claimant] received for relief . . . of pain or other symptoms; and (vi) any measures the claimant personally used to relieve pain or other symptoms.” 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1529(c)(3) & 416.929(c)(3); see also Watson v. Heckler, 738 F.2d 1169, 1172 (11th Cir. 1984) (per curiam).

Section 404.1529(c)(3) permits an ALJ evaluating a claimant's symptoms to consider daily activities, the symptoms' location, duration, frequency, and intensity, aggravating factors, medication, and other treatments.

Garred v. Astrue · filed 2010-06-16(c)(3)

In evaluating the credibility of a claimant’s testimony regarding her symptoms, the ALJ may consider, inter alia: (1) the claimant’s daily activities; (2) “the location, duration frequency and intensity” of the pain and other symptoms; (3) factors that precipitate and aggravate the symptoms; (4) the “type, dosage, effectiveness, and side effects of any medication”; and (5) other treatments the claimant uses to relieve her pain. 20 C.F.R. § 404.1529(c)(3).

Section 404.1529(c)(3)(i) does not require objective verification of a claimant's reported daily activities; the evidence is evaluated in relation to the objective medical evidence and other evidence.

Holcomb v. Astrue · filed 2010-07-22(c)(3)(i), (c)(4)

Although not sufficient grounds for reversal, we do note that the ALJ cited no authority for his requirement that the claimant’s stated activities of daily living be “objectively verified with [a] reasonable degree of certainty,” Aplt. App. Vol. 2 at 26. In fact, neither 20 C.F.R. § 404.1529(c)(3)(i) nor § 416.929(c)(3)(i) requires verification. The regulations simply state that such evidence will be evaluated “in relation to the objective medical evidence and other evidence.” 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1529(c)(4); 416.929(c)(4).

Section 404.1529(c)(2) and (c)(4) require an ALJ evaluating subjective symptoms to consider the objective medical evidence.

Simila v. Astrue · filed 2009-07-22(c)(2), (c)(4)

But Carradine does not imply that an ALJ can never consider the lack of objective evidence in rejecting a claimant’s subjective complaints. Such a reading would nullify 20 C.F.R. § 404.1529(c)(2) and (4), which require an ALJ to consider the objective medical evidence.

Section 404.1529(c)(3) requires an ALJ evaluating pain or other symptoms to consider the claimant’s daily activities, symptom characteristics, precipitating and aggravating factors, medications and side effects, treatment, relief measures, and other functional-limitations factors.

Correale-Englehart v. Astrue · filed 2010-02-08(c)(3)

These include: 1) the claimant’s daily activities; 2) the location, duration, frequency and intensity of symptoms; 3) precipitating and aggravating factors; 4) type, dosage, effectiveness and side effects of any medications taken; 5) other treatment received; and 6) other measures taken to relieve symptoms; and (7) any other factors concerning the individual’s functional limitations due to pain or other symptoms. 20 C.F.R. § 404.1529(c)(3)(I)-(vi).

Section 404.1529(c)(1) requires an ALJ to evaluate the intensity, persistence, and limiting effects of symptoms after finding a medically determinable impairment that could reasonably be expected to produce them.

Aytch v. Astrue · filed 2010-02-18(c)(1)

Upon establishing the existence of a medically-determinable physical or mental impairment that could reasonably be expected to produce the claimant’s symptom(s), the ALJ must evaluate the intensity, persistence and limiting effects of said symptom(s) on a claimant’s ability to perform basic work.

Section 404.1529(c) requires the ALJ to evaluate the intensity and persistence of pain using all available evidence, including medical history, medical signs and laboratory findings, treating providers’ statements, and the claimant’s subjective testimony.

Eovaldi v. Astrue · filed 2010-07-27(c)

In order to evaluate the intensity and persistence of pain, the ALJ considers all available evidence, including medical history, medical signs and laboratory findings, statements of treating providers, and the subjective testimony of the claimant. 20 C.F.R. § 404.1529(c).

Section 404.1529(c)(3) requires an ALJ to consider the claimant’s daily activities, symptoms, medications, treatment, relief measures, and other functional limitations when evaluating pain or other symptoms.

Ramos v. Astrue · filed 2009-11-27(c)(3)

Rather, the ALJ must consider all of the evidence, including the claimant’s daily activities; the location, duration, frequency and inten...sity of the claimant’s pain or other symptoms; precipitating and aggravating factors; the type, dosage, effectiveness and side effects of any medication the claimant takes to alleviate pain or other symptoms; treatment, other than medication, for relief of pain or other symptoms; any measures the claimant uses to relieve pain or other symptoms; and any other factors concerning the claimant’s functional limitations and restrictions due to pain or other symptoms. 20 C.F.R. § 404.1529(c)(3); SSR 96-7p.

Section 404.1529 requires an ALJ evaluating credibility to first determine whether medically determinable impairments could reasonably be expected to produce the alleged symptoms and then assess their intensity, persistence, and limiting effects on the claimant’s capacity to work.

Mortise v. Astrue · filed 2010-05-13(a), (c)

In analyzing credibility, the ALJ must first determine whether the claimant has medically determinable impairments, “which could reasonably be expected to produce the pain or other symptoms alleged.” 20 C.F.R. § 404.1529(a); S.S.R. 96-7p, 1996 WL 374186, at *2. Second, if medically determinable impairments are shown, then the ALJ must evaluate the intensity, persistence, and limiting effects of the symptoms to determine the extent to which they limit the claimant’s capacity to work.

Section 404.1529(c)(1) requires the Commissioner to evaluate the intensity, persistence, and functional limitations of a claimant’s pain when a medically determinable impairment could reasonably be expected to produce it.

Hilsdorf v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2010-07-15(c)(1)

When a claimant has a medically determinable impairment that can reasonably be expected to produce the alleged pain, the Commissioner must evaluate the intensity, persistence, and functionally limiting effects of that pain. 20 C.F.R. § 404.1529(c)(1).

Section 404.1529(c)(3)(i) permits an ALJ to consider a claimant’s daily activities when evaluating the credibility of subjective symptom allegations.

Salazar v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2010-04-06(c)(3)(i)

In evaluating a claimant’s credibility, the ALJ may consider, among other things, the claimant’s daily activities. See 20 C.F.R. § 404.1529(c)(3)(i); Watson v. Heckler, 738 F.2d 1169, 1172 (11th Cir. 1984) (per curiam).

Section 404.1529(c)(4) permits symptoms to be evaluated based on inconsistencies in the evidence and conflicts between a claimant's statements and the rest of the evidence.

Gantea v. Commr. of Social Security · filed 2010-06-02(c)(4)

The administrative law judge was entitled to discredit Gantea’s complaints because neither of the physicians who prescribed Gantea’s medications stated that side effects limited Gantea’s ability to work. See Swindle v. Sullivan, 914 F.2d 222, 226 (11th Cir. 1990); 20 C.F.R. § 404.1529(c)(4) (evaluating symptoms based on “any inconsistencies in the evidence and the extent to which there are any conflicts between [the] statements [of the claimant] and the rest of the evidence”).

Section 404.1529 requires the ALJ to determine whether an impairment could reasonably be expected to produce the alleged symptoms and then consider all available evidence, including objective medical evidence, medical opinions, claimant statements, and inconsistencies.

Simmons v. SSA · filed 2010-09-08(b), (c)(1)-(4)

In evaluating the severity of a claimant’s alleged symptoms, the ALJ must first determine the presence of a medically determinable impairment that could reasonably be expected to produce the alleged symptoms. See 20 C.F.R. § 404.1529(b). Once an impairment is established, the ALJ will consider all available evidence including objective medical evidence, the opinions of a claimant’s treating or nontreating sources, and statements by the claimant regarding their symptoms. See 20 C.F.R. § 404.1529(c)(1)-(3). The ALJ will also consider any inconsistencies in the record and “any conflicts between [the claimant’s] statements and the rest of the evidence . . . including [the] laboratory findings, and statements by [the claimant’s] treating, or nontreating sources.” 20 C.F.R. § 404.1529(c)(4). ... Based on Simmons’ treating physicians’ notes, the objective medical evidence, the subjective evidence and the state agency medical consultants’ opinions, substantial evidence in the record supports the ALJ’s determination that the alleged intensity and severity of Simmons’ fatigue and other symptoms during periods of exacerbation was not entirely credible. ... Therefore her reliance on the Grid was appropriate.

Section 404.1529(c)(3) requires an ALJ, when clinical evidence does not fully support symptom testimony, to consider specified factors including daily activities, symptom characteristics, medication, treatment, and measures used to relieve symptoms.

Saxon v. Astrue · filed 2011-03-04(c)(3)(i)-(vi)

If plaintiffs testimony concerning the intensity, persistence or functional limitations associated with his impairments is not fully supported by clinical evidence, the ALJ must consider additional factors in order to assess that testimony, including: 1) daily activities; 2) location, duration, frequency and intensity of any symptoms; 3) precipitating and aggravating factors; 4) type, dosage, effectiveness and side effects of any medications taken; 5) other treatment received; and 6) other measures taken to relieve symptoms. 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1529(c)(3)(i)-(vi), 416.929(c)(3)(i)-(vi). ... Having reviewed the Administrative Transcript in its entirety, the Court finds that the ALJ applied the correct legal standard, enumerated in 20 C.F.R. § 404.1529(c)(3)(i)-(iv), in assessing plaintiffs credibility. ... Consequently, the Court finds that the ALJ properly assessed the factors enumerated in 20 C.F.R. § 404.1529(c)(3)(i)-(vi) and § 416.929(c)(3)(i)-(vi).

Section 404.1529(c) requires an ALJ evaluating subjective symptoms to consider evidence such as pain medications, subjective complaints, daily activities, and objective medical findings, and to connect that evidence to the credibility conclusion.

Outlaw v. Astrue · filed 2011-03-16(c)

The ALJ acknowledged that Outlaw took a variety of pain medications, outlined Outlaw’s subjective complaints and objective diagnoses, and supported his conclusion using a variety of evidence. The depth or scope of the ALJ’s analysis may not be ideal, but it satisfied the regulations and sufficiently connected the evidence to his conclusions.

Section 404.1529 requires an ALJ to evaluate the intensity and persistence of a claimant's symptoms and their effect on work capacity when a medically determinable impairment could reasonably be expected to produce them, considering objective and other evidence about the symptoms and their effects.

Mack v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2011-03-22(c)(1), (c)(3)

When the medical signs and laboratory findings establish that the claimant has a medically determinable impairment that could reasonably be expected to produce the claimant’s symptoms, the ALJ must evaluate the intensity and persistence of a claimant’s symptoms and the extent to which those symptoms limit the claimant’s capacity for work. 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1529(c)(1), 416.929(c)(1); Social Security Regulation 96-7p (“SSR 96-7p”) at 2. In doing so, the ALJ is to consider the objective medical evidence and other evidence provided by the claimant and her treating and nontreating sources concerning what may precipitate or aggravate the claimant’s symptoms, what medications, treatment or methods are used to alleviate the symptoms, and how the symptoms affect the claimant’s daily living. 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1529(c)(3), 416.929(c)(3); SSR 96-7p at 3. The ALJ’s credibility finding must be grounded in the evidence and contain specific reasons that are supported by the record evidence. SSR 96-7p at 4.

Section 404.1529(a) requires objective medical evidence of an impairment reasonably expected to produce the alleged symptoms, followed by consideration of the symptoms’ intensity and persistence.

Cruz v. Astrue · filed 2010-09-27(a)

The Regulations establish a two-part test for determining whether complaints of pain contribute to a finding of disability: (1) the claimant must provide objective medical evidence of a medically determinable impairment or combination of impairments that reasonably could be expected to produce the symptoms alleged; and (2) once an ALJ has found an impairment that reasonably could cause the symptoms alleged, the ALJ must consider the intensity and persistence of these symptoms. 20 C.F.R. § 404.1529(a).

Section 404.1529 requires an ALJ evaluating symptoms to consider competent and probative testimony from family members and employers who observed the claimant’s symptoms and daily activities.

Herron v. Commissioner of Social SEC. · filed 2011-03-04(a), (c), and (c)(3)

Testimony such as this from family members and employers who were in a position to observe the claimant’s symptoms and daily activities is competent and probative evidence.

Section 404.1529(c)(3) requires an ALJ evaluating subjective complaints to consider daily activities, pain characteristics, precipitating and aggravating factors, medication effects and side effects, and functional restrictions.

Sangel v. Astrue · filed 2011-05-23(c)(3)

When evaluating a claimant’s subjective complaints, the ALJ must consider 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; and 5) functional restrictions.

Section 404.1529 requires objective medical evidence of an underlying condition that could reasonably be expected to cause the alleged pain, but not objective proof of the pain itself.

Pollard v. Astrue · filed 2012-06-13

While both the regulations and the Hand standard require objective medical evidence of a condition that could reasonably be expected to cause the pain alleged, neither requires objective proof of the pain itself. Thus under both the regulations and the first (objectively identifiable condition) and third (reasonably expected to cause pain alleged) parts of the Hand standard a claimant who can show that his condition could reasonably be expected to give rise to the pain he alleges has established a claim, of disability and is not required to produce additional, objective proof of the pain itself. See 20 CFR §§ 404.1529 and 416.929; Hale at 1011.

Section 404.1529 requires a two-step evaluation of subjective complaints: first determine whether objective medical evidence shows an impairment reasonably expected to cause the alleged symptoms, then evaluate their intensity and persistence to determine how they limit the capacity for work.

Mitchell v. Colvin · filed 2014-03-13(b), (c)

The regulations provide a two-step analysis for evaluating a person’s subjective complaints of pain and other symptoms. ... First, the adjudicator must determine whether there is objective medical evidence showing the existence of a medical impairment that could be reasonably expected to produce the pain or other alleged symptoms. ... Second, the adjudicator evaluates the intensity and persistence of the symptoms to determine how they limit the capacity for work.

Section 404.1529 requires an ALJ to consider whether a claimant’s pain is disabling based on all objective and subjective evidence, and lack of objective medical evidence alone cannot discredit the claimant’s reports.

Marr v. Colvin · filed 2014-09-12(a), (c)(2), and (c)(3)

The Commissioner’s own regulations make clear that a lack of objective medical evidence alone is not sufficient to discredit a claimant’s subjective reports of disabling pain.

Section 404.1529(c) requires an ALJ evaluating a claimant’s pain to consider the claimant’s subjective pain symptoms, daily-activity limitations, factors that worsen or relieve the pain, treatment, and consistency with objective medical evidence.

Johnson v SSA · filed 2017-10-12(c)

The ALJ must consider the claimant’s pain complaints when determining his RFC. 20 C.F.R. § 404.1529. However, the ALJ is not required to accept the claimant’s assertion of pain wholesale. Shaw v. Sec’y of Health & Human Servs., 1994 WL 251000, at *2 (D. Mass. June 9, 1994) (finding claimant’s assertion of pain was unsupported by the other medical evidence). Instead, when evaluating a claimant’s assertions of pain, the ALJ must consider the claimant’s subjective symptoms of pain, whether his daily activities are limited by the pain, whether there are factors that make the pain worse or better, whether the claimant is receiving treatment for the pain, and whether the pain is consistent with the claimant’s other objective medical evidence. 20 C.F.R. § 404.1529(c); see Avery v. Secretary of Health & Human Servs., 797 F.2d. 19, 29 (1st Cir. 1986). ... Here, the ALJ evaluated Johnson’s level of pain by considering a number of the factors set out in 20 C.F.R. § 404.1529(c).

Section 404.1529(c)(3) requires an ALJ assessing a claimant’s subjective symptoms to consider the listed factors, including daily activities, symptom characteristics, precipitating factors, medication, treatment, other relief measures, and functional limitations.

Bruno v. Colvin · filed 2017-12-15(c)(3)

When assessing the credibility of a claimant’s subjective symptoms, the ALJ must consider 1) the individual’s daily activities, 2) the location, duration, frequency, and intensity of the individual’s pain or other symptoms, 3) factors that precipitate and aggravate the symptoms, 4) the type, dosage, effectiveness, and side effects of any medication the individual takes or has taken to alleviate pain or other symptoms, 5) treatment, other than medication, the individual receives or has received for relief of pain or other symptoms, 6) any measures other than treatment the individual uses or has used to relieve pain or other symptoms and 7) any other factors concerning the individual's functional limitations and restrictions due to pain or other symptoms. SSR no. 96-7p; see also 20 C.F.R. § 404.1529(c)(3).

Section 404.1529 identifies treatment other than medication and measures used to relieve pain or symptoms as additional factors in evaluating a claimant’s subjective complaints.

Reed v. Social Security Administration Commissioner · filed 2018-02-16

In assessing the credibility of a claimant, the ALJ is required to examine and to apply the five factors from Polaski v. Heckler, 739 F.2d 1320 (8th Cir. 1984) or from 20 C.F.R. § 404.1529 and 20 C.F.R. § 416.929.1 ... Social Security Regulations 20 C.F.R. § 404.1529 and 20 C.F.R. § 416.929 require the analysis of two additional factors: (1) “treatment, other than medication, you receive or have received for relief of your pain or other symptoms” and (2) “any measures you use or have used to relieve your pain or symptoms (e.g., lying flat on your back, standing for 15 to 20 minutes every hour, sleeping on a board, etc.).” However, under Polaski and its progeny, the Eighth Circuit has not yet required the analysis of these additional factors. ... Thus, this Court will not require the analysis of these additional factors in this case.

Section 404.1529 does not require an ALJ to accept a claimant's subjective complaints without question; the ALJ may weigh their credibility against other evidence in the record.

Bushey v. Berryhill · filed 2018-06-26

Next, Bushey argues that the ALJ erred in discounting Bushey’s subjective pain symptoms, in violation of 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1529 and 416.929. However, an ALJ “is not required to accept the claimant’s subjective complaints without question; he may exercise discretion in weighing the credibility of the claimant’s testimony in light of the other evidence in the record.” Genier v. Astrue, 606 F.3d 46, 49 (2d Cir. 2010). ... Substantial evidence therefore supported the ALJ’s decision to discount Bushey’s subjective pain symptoms. See Poupore, 566 F.3d at 307.

Section 404.1529 identifies treatment and other measures used to relieve pain or symptoms as factors in evaluating subjective complaints, although the court held that Eighth Circuit precedent did not require analyzing them.

Lee v. Social Security Administration Commissioner · filed 2019-01-10

Social Security Regulations 20 C.F.R. § 404.1529 and 20 C.F.R. § 416.929 require the analysis of two additional factors: (1) “treatment, other than medication, you receive or have received for relief of your pain or other symptoms” and (2) “any measures you use or have used to relieve your pain or symptoms (e.g., lying flat on your back, standing for 15 to 20 minutes every hour, sleeping on a board, etc.).” However, under Polaski and its progeny, the Eighth Circuit has not yet required the analysis of these additional factors. See Shultz v. Astrue, 479 F.3d 979, 983 (2007). Thus, this Court will not require the analysis of these additional factors in this case.

Section 404.1529 requires an ALJ evaluating a claimant's subjective complaints to examine and apply the specified credibility factors.

Smith v. Social Security Administration Commissioner · filed 2019-01-10

In assessing the credibility of a claimant, the ALJ is required to examine and to apply the five factors from Polaski v. Heckler, 739 F.2d 1320 (8th Cir. 1984) or from 20 C.F.R. § 404.1529 and 20 C.F.R. § 416.929.1 See Shultz v. Astrue, 479 F.3d 979, 983 (2007).

Section 404.1529 requires considering specified factors when evaluating a claimant's subjective symptoms, including treatment and measures used for relief, but this court did not require those two additional factors under Eighth Circuit precedent.

Vermillion v. Social Security Administration Commissioner · filed 2019-01-25

In assessing the credibility of a claimant, the ALJ is required to examine and to apply the five factors from Polaski v. Heckler, 739 F.2d 1320 (8th Cir. 1984) or from 20 C.F.R. § 404.1529 and 20 C.F.R. § 416.929.1 See Shultz v. Astrue, 479 F.3d 979, 983 (2007). ... Social Security Regulations 20 C.F.R. § 404.1529 and 20 C.F.R. § 416.929 require the analysis of two additional factors: (1) “treatment, other than medication, you receive or have received for relief of your pain or other symptoms” and (2) “any measures you use or have used to relieve your pain or symptoms (e.g., lying flat on your back, standing for 15 to 20 minutes every hour, sleeping on a board, etc.).” However, under Polaski and its progeny, the Eighth Circuit has not yet required the analysis of these additional factors. See Shultz v. Astrue, 479 F.3d 979, 983 (2007). Thus, this Court will not require the analysis of these additional factors in this case.

Section 404.1529 identifies treatment other than medication and measures used to relieve pain or other symptoms as additional factors in evaluating a claimant's subjective complaints.

Litchford v. Social Security Administration Commissioner · filed 2019-03-07

In assessing the credibility of a claimant, the ALJ is required to examine and to apply the five factors from Polaski v. Heckler, 739 F.2d 1320 (8th Cir. 1984) or from 20 C.F.R. § 404.1529 and 20 C.F.R. § 416.929.2 See Shultz v. Astrue, 479 F.3d 979, 983 (2007). The factors to consider are as follows: (1) the claimant’s daily activities; (2) the duration, frequency, and intensity of the pain; (3) the precipitating and aggravating factors; (4) the dosage, effectiveness, and side effects of medication; and (5) the functional restrictions. See Polaski, 739 at 1322. ... Social Security Regulations 20 C.F.R. § 404.1529 and 20 C.F.R. § 416.929 require the analysis of two additional factors: (1) “treatment, other than medication, you receive or have received for relief of your pain or other symptoms” and (2) “any measures you use or have used to relieve your pain or symptoms (e.g., lying flat on your back, standing for 15 to 20 minutes every hour, sleeping on a board, etc.).” However, under Polaski and its progeny, the Eighth Circuit has not yet required the analysis of these additional factors. See Shultz v. Astrue, 479 F.3d 979, 983 (2007). Thus, this Court will not require the analysis of these additional factors in this case.

Section 404.1529 requires an ALJ first to determine whether a medically determinable impairment could reasonably produce a claimant’s symptoms and then to evaluate their intensity, persistence, and limiting effects using objective medical and other evidence.

HUGGINS v. COMMISSIONER OF SOCIAL SECURITY · filed 2019-08-01(c)

The Social Security Regulations provide a framework under which the ALJ must consider a claimant’s subjective complaints. See 20 C.F.R. § 404.1529; see also SSR 16-3p, 2016 WL 1119029 (March 16, 2016). First, the ALJ must determine whether there is an underlying medically determinable impairment that could reasonably be expected to produce the claimant’s pain or other symptoms. 20 CFR 404.1529(c). Second, if a medically determinable impairment is found, the ALJ must evaluate the “intensity, persistence, and limiting effects” of the claimant’s symptoms to determine the extent to which they limit the claimant’s functioning. Id. The ALJ may discredit the claimant’s statements as to the “intensity, persistence, and limiting effects” of their symptoms if they are not supported by objective medical evidence. 20 CFR 404.1529(c)(4). The ALJ properly followed that process as required by the Regulations.

Section 404.1529 requires an ALJ to consider whether a medically determinable impairment could reasonably be expected to produce the alleged symptoms and to assess the symptoms’ intensity, persistence, and limiting effects against the medical and other evidence in the record.

Huskey v. SSA · filed 2019-09-30(a), (c)(4)

The SSA regulations are set forth in 20 C.F.R. § 404.1529, which states, in part: ... [S]tatements about your pain or other symptoms will not alone establish that you are disabled. There must be objective medical evidence from an acceptable medical source that shows you have a medical impairment(s) which could reasonably be expected to produce the pain or other symptoms alleged and that, when considered with all of the other evidence (including statements about the intensity and persistence of your pain or other symptoms which may reasonably be accepted as consistent with the medical signs and laboratory findings), would lead to a conclusion that you are disabled. 20 C.F.R. § 404.1529(a). ... In the instant case, the ALJ found Plaintiff’s medically determinable impairments could reasonably be expected to produce the alleged symptoms. [Tr. 24]. However, the ALJ further found that Plaintiff’s statements concerning the intensity, persistence, and limiting effects of his symptoms are inconsistent with the medical evidence and other evidence in the record. [Tr. 24]; see also 20 C.F.R. § 404.1529(c)(4). The ALJ’s finding is supported by substantial evidence in the record. ... When considering all medical evidence and Plaintiff’s personal testimony regarding his activities, the ALJ properly evaluated Plaintiff’s subjective complaints of pain. Because the ALJ’s evaluation is supported by substantial evidence, it is entitled to deference. Thus, remand is unwarranted.

Section 404.1529(c) requires an ALJ evaluating symptoms to consider daily activities, pain characteristics, medication, treatment, other relief measures, functional limitations, and inconsistencies between statements and the evidence.

BEACH v. COMMISSIONER OF SOCIAL SECURITY · filed 2019-11-21(c)

Additionally, the ALJ will consider daily activities; the location, duration, frequency, and intensity of pain or other symptoms; factors that precipitate and aggravate the symptoms; the type, dosage, effectiveness, and side effects of any medication an individual takes or has taken to alleviate pain or other symptoms; treatment, other than medication, an individual receives or has received for relief of pain or other symptoms; any measures other than treatment an individual uses or has used to relieve pain or other symptoms; and any other factors concerning an individual's functional limitations and restrictions due to pain or other symptoms. 20 C.F.R. § 404.1529(c). The ALJ also will look at inconsistencies between the claimant's statements and the evidence presented. Id.

Section 404.1529 requires an ALJ to consider a claimant's pain and evaluate subjective complaints against medical and other evidence, permitting the ALJ to discount complaints that the record does not support.

Brown v. SSA · filed 2020-01-07(c)(4)

Such a finding is permissible under 20 C.F.R. § 404.1529(c)(4). ... We agree with the Commissioner. ... Here, the ALJ found that that Ms. Brown’s alleged symptoms were not supported by the medical and other evidence provided. ... When considering all medical evidence and Brown’s personal testimony regarding her activities, the ALJ properly evaluated her subjective complaints of pain.

Section 404.1529 requires an ALJ to first determine whether a medically determinable impairment could produce the claimant's symptoms and then assess the symptoms' intensity and limiting effects using the entire record and pertinent listed factors.

Smith v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2020-03-11(a), (b), and (b)(3)(i)-(vii)

Social Security Regulations require a two-step process for the ALJ to evaluate a claimant’s subjective complaints. First the ALJ is directed to consider whether there is an underlying medically determinable physical or mental impairment(s) that could reasonably be expected to produce an individual’s symptoms, such as pain. 20 C.F.R. § 404.1529(a). Second, if an impairment is shown, the ALJ must evaluate the intensity and persistence of those symptoms to determine the extent to which the symptoms limit an individual’s ability to perform work-related activities. 20 C.F.R. § 404.1529(b). When objective medical evidence alone does not substantiate the claimant’s alleged symptoms, the ALJ must consider the case record as a whole. Scitney v. Colvin, 41 F.Supp.3d 289, 303 (W.D.N.Y. 2014). The ALJ must also consider the following factors: (1) daily activities; (2) location, duration, frequency, and intensity of pain or other symptoms; (3) factors that precipitate and aggravate the symptoms; (4) the type, dosage, effectiveness, and side effects of any medication an individual takes or has taken to alleviate pain or other symptoms; (5) treatment, other than medication, an individual receives or has received for pain or other symptoms; (6) any measures other than treatment an individual uses or has used to relieve pain or other symptoms; (7) and any other factors concerning an individual’s functional limitations and restrictions due to pain or other symptoms. 20 C.F.R. § 404.1529(b)(3)(i)-(vii). However, an ALJ need only discuss factors that are pertinent to the evidence of record.

Section 404.1529(c)(3) requires an ALJ evaluating subjective symptoms to consider specified factors, including daily activities, pain characteristics, medications and treatments, and measures used for relief.

Yagle v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2020-03-23(c)(3)

An ALJ must consider all available evidence, including objective medical evidence and statements from the claimant and others. 20 C.F.R. § 404.1529(c)(2)–(3); SSR 16-3p. The ALJ must consider factors that include evidence of daily activities; the location, duration, frequency, and intensity of pain and other symptoms; precipitating and aggravating factors; the type, dosage, effectiveness, and side effects of any medication taken to alleviate pain or other symptoms; treatment other than medication for relief of pain or other symptoms; and measures taken to relieve pain or other symptoms. 20 C.F.R. § 404.1529(c)(3)(i)–(vi); see also SSR 16-3p. An ALJ also must consider “whether there are any inconsistencies in the evidence and the extent to which there are any conflicts between [the claimant’s] statements and the rest of the evidence.” Id. § 404.1529(c)(4); see also SSR 16-3p. An ALJ must articulate the reasoning. Holt, 921 F.2d at 1223. ... Yagle’s argument is unpersuasive. The ALJ discussed Yagle’s self-reported daily activities—including walking daily and riding a bicycle. Tr. 25; see also Tr. 21 (citing Tr. 244–45 and observing that Yagle’s June 2015 disability report showed she could still complete most activities).7 He also discussed Yagle’s medications and the treatments she has tried to relieve her pain.

Section 404.1529 requires an ALJ first to determine whether a medically determinable impairment could produce the alleged symptoms and then to evaluate the symptoms' intensity and persistence and their effects on work-related activities using available medical and nonmedical evidence.

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

In evaluating a claimant’s subjective complaints of pain or other symptoms, an ALJ undertakes a two-step process. See 20 C.F.R. § 404.1529. First, the ALJ determines whether the claimant has a medically determinable impairment that could reasonably be expected to produce the alleged symptoms. 20 C.F.R. § 404.1529(b). Second, the ALJ evaluates the “intensity and persistence” of the symptoms and determines the extent to which the symptoms limit the ability to perform work-related activities. 20 C.F.R. § 404.1529(c). In evaluating the intensity and persistence of a claimant’s symptoms, the ALJ is to consider all available evidence from the claimant’s medical sources and nonmedical sources about how the symptoms affect the claimant. Id.

Section 404.1529(c)(3) requires an ALJ evaluating a claimant’s subjective complaints to consider all related evidence, including daily activities, symptom characteristics, medication, and functional restrictions.

Hokic v. Saul · filed 2020-08-21(c)(3)

When determining the credibility of a claimant’s subjective complaints, the ALJ must consider all evidence relating to the complaints, including claimant’s daily activities; the duration, frequency and intensity of the symptoms; any precipitating and aggravating factors; the dosage, effectiveness and side effects of medication; and any functional restrictions. ... 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1529(c)(3) and 416.929(c)(3).

Section 404.1529(c)(3) recognizes that pain or other symptoms may contribute to functional loss when relevant medical signs or laboratory findings establish a medically determinable impairment reasonably expected to cause them.

Clinton v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2020-09-08(c)(3)

Pain or other symptoms may be important factors contributing to a disability claimant’s functional loss and affects a claimant’s ability to perform basic work activities where relevant medical signs or laboratory findings show the existence of a medically determinable impairment that could “reasonably” be expected to cause the associated pain or other symptoms. 20 C.F.R. § 404.1529(c)(3). ... In this case, the ALJ’s credibility finding is supported by substantial evidence in the record.

Section 404.1529(c)(3) requires considering specified factors, including daily activities, pain characteristics, treatment, symptom-relief measures, and treatment compliance, when evaluating a claimant's subjective complaints.

Peterson v. Berryhill · filed 2020-10-07(c)(3)

The ALJ should consider all evidence in the record and apply the factors to be considered under the regulations 20 C.F.R. § 404.1529(c)(3). These factors include daily activities; the location, duration, frequency, and intensity of the pain; the medication used to alleviate symptoms; any other treatment for the pain; any other measures taken to relieve symptoms; and failure to comply with treatment. Id. The ALJ only need acknowledge and consider those factors before discounting a claimant’s subjective complaints. Masterson, 363 F.3d at 738. Courts generally defer to the ALJ’s evaluation of credibility provided the determination is supported by “good reasons and substantial evidence.” Turpin v. Colvin, 750 F.3d 989, 993 (8th Cir. 2014); 20 C.F.R. § 404.1529; SSR 16-3p. Here, the ALJ acknowledged and considered those factors. (Tr. 20.)

Section 404.1529(c)(2) bars an administrative law judge from rejecting a claimant’s subjective complaints solely because objective medical evidence does not substantiate them.

Rawls v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2020-10-27(c)(2)

As Plaintiff correctly points out, an administrative law judge may not reject a claimant’s subjective complaints solely because the objective medical evidence does not substantiate the complaints. 20 C.F.R. § 404.1529(c)(2) (“[W]e will not reject your statements about the intensity and persistence of your . . . symptoms or about the effect your symptoms have on your ability to work solely because the available objective medical evidence does not substantiate your statements.”).

Section 404.1529 requires a two-step assessment of subjective complaints: determine whether a medically determinable impairment is present, then evaluate symptom intensity and persistence from the entire record, including daily activities and inconsistencies in the evidence.

Bathgate v. Saul · filed 2021-05-18(b), (c), (c)(4)

Social Security regulations provide a two-step framework for considering subjective complaints. First, the ALJ determines whether “medical signs or laboratory findings show that a medically determinable impairment(s) is present.” 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1529(b), 416.929(b). Second, the ALJ evaluates the intensity and persistence of the claimant’s symptoms by considering the record of evidence in its entirety. Id. §§ 404.1529(c), 416.929(c). At this second stage, the ALJ considers the objective medical evidence, as well as other evidence including the claimant’s daily activities, the frequency and intensity of pain and other symptoms, precipitating and aggravating factors, the effectiveness of medication and other treatment methods, and other factors regarding functional limitations or restrictions due to pain or other symptoms. Id. Further, the ALJ should also consider inconsistencies in the available evidence to ascertain whether a claimant’s subjective claims of pain and its related symptoms can reasonably be accepted. Id. §§ 404.1529(c)(4), 416.929(c)(4). “An ALJ, however, cannot rely exclusively on objective evidence to undermine a claimant's subjective assertions of disabling pain.” Hinton v. Berryhill, Civil No. MJG-16-4043, 2017 WL 4404441, at *2 (D. Md. Oct. 4, 2017) (citing Lewis v. Berryhill, 858 F.3d 858, 866 (4th Cir. 2017) (holding that the ALJ improperly discounted the claimant's subjective complaints “based solely on the lack of objective evidence” supporting the claimant's assertions)).

Section 404.1529 requires a two-step evaluation of subjective symptoms: the ALJ first asks whether a medically determinable impairment could reasonably produce them, then assesses their intensity, persistence, and effect on the ability to work using all available evidence, without requiring objective evidence at the second step.

Whitaker v. Dudek · filed 2025-02-05(b)-(c)

The regulations provide a two-step process for evaluating Plaintiff’s subjective complaints. 20 C.F.R. § 404.1529; see also SSR 16-3p, 2016 WL 1119029 (Mar. 16, 2016). First, the ALJ must determine “whether objective medical evidence presents a ‘medically determinable impairment’ that could reasonably be expected to produce the claimant’s alleged symptoms.” Arakas v. Comm’r of Soc. Sec. Admin., 983 F.3d 83, 95 (4th Cir. 2020) (citing 20 C.F.R. § 404.1529(b); SSR 16-3p). Second, “after finding a medically determinable impairment, the ALJ must assess the intensity and persistence of the alleged symptoms to determine how they affect the claimant’s ability to work and whether the claimant is disabled.” Id. The ALJ must consider all available evidence in this determination, including objective medical evidence, an individual’s statements about the intensity, persistence, and limiting effects of the symptoms, and medical opinions and statements from others. Id. The claimant does not need to produce objective evidence to satisfy this second prong. Id.

Section 404.1529(c) directs the ALJ to consider seven categories of relevant evidence when evaluating subjective symptoms; the ALJ need not analyze every factor but should demonstrate consideration of the relevant evidence, including the claimant’s course of treatment.

Holland v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2025-04-14(c)

To evaluate the “intensity, persistence, and limiting effects of an individual’s symptoms,” the ALJ considers medical evidence, the claimant’s statements, other information provided by medical sources, and any other relevant evidence in the record. ... Other relevant evidence includes: daily activities; the location, duration, frequency, and intensity of pain or symptoms; precipitating and aggravating factors; the type, dosage, effectiveness, and side effects of any medication; treatment, other than medication, to relieve pain; any measures used to relieve pain; and “[o]ther factors concerning … functional limitations and restrictions due to pain or other symptoms.” 20 C.F.R. § 404.1529(c). “The ALJ need not analyze all seven factors, but should show that he considered the relevant evidence.” ... Considering Holland’s course of treatment is, however, precisely what the ALJ should do when analyzing the persuasiveness of subjective symptom complaints. ... Because the ALJ did discuss and adequately consider the factors listed under Ruling 16-3p, there is no basis for remand on this issue.

Section 404.1529 requires an ALJ evaluating subjective complaints to consider objective medical evidence and factors such as daily activities, pain frequency and intensity, medication and side effects, and other pain-relief measures; a claimant’s symptom statements alone do not establish disability.

Duff v. SSA · filed 2025-06-11(a), (c)(2)–(3)

In evaluating a claimant’s subjective complaints, the ALJ considers objective medical evidence, as well as other non-exhaustive factors such as evidence of daily activities, the frequency and intensity of pain, medication taken and any resulting side effects, and any other measures taken to alleviate the pain. See 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1529(c)(2)–(3), 416.929(c)(2)–(3). A claimant’s statement that he is experiencing pain or other symptoms will not, taken alone, establish that he is disabled. See 20 C.F.R. § 404.1529(a); Walters, 127 F.3d at 531; Duncan v. Sec’y of Health & Hum. Servs., 801 F.2d 847, 853 (6th Cir. 1986) (discussing the need for objective medical evidence); see also Vickers v. Comm’r of Soc. Sec., No. 20-1935, 2021 WL 4468414, at *5 (6th Cir. July 12, 2021) (“Subjective complaints, even if internally consistent in the record, shall ‘not alone be conclusive evidence of disability.’” (quoting 42 U.S.C. § 423(d)(5)(A))). ... Therefore, the Court finds no error in the ALJ’s evaluation of Claimant’s subjective complaints.

Section 404.1529(c)(1) requires an ALJ evaluating subjective pain complaints to consider all available evidence, including the claimant’s history, medical signs and laboratory findings, and statements about how the symptoms affect the claimant.

Claiborne v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2025-07-28(c)(1)

The ALJ must consider all the available evidence, including: (1) the claimant's history; (2) signs and laboratory findings; and (3) statements from the claimant, treating or nontreating sources, or other persons about how the symptoms affect the claimant. 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1529(c)(1), 416.929(c)(1). ... Based on the foregoing, the undersigned finds the ALJ properly considered and discounted Claiborne’s subjective pain complaints when assigning an RFC consistent with a full range of light work.

Section 404.1529 permits an ALJ to assess subjective complaints using the claimant’s testimony, treating physicians’ observations, and credible medical evidence.

Lopez v. Astrue · filed 2012-03-08

The ALJ stated that he considered plaintiffs subjective complaints in compliance with 20 C.F.R. § 404.1529 and Social Security Rulings 96-4p and 96-7p, and that he considered plaintiffs testimony and the information and observations of plaintiffs treating physicians and others. ... All of the foregoing are proper for the ALJ to consider in assessing plaintiffs credibility.

An ALJ may discount subjective complaints of pain after weighing them against medical reports and objective medical evidence.

Bush v. Comm Social Security · filed 2004-05-14(c)

The only rejection by the ALJ was of Bush’s testimony, which the ALJ found less than credible and unsupported by the objective medical evidence.

Section 404.1529 requires consideration of pain associated with a medically established impairment; rejecting such testimony solely because objective evidence does not fully corroborate it requires specific findings.

Betty L. VARNEY, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. SECRETARY OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES, Defendant-Appellee · filed 1988-05-16

Yet the AU gives no reason for disregarding Varney’s pain testimony, other than the assertion that her subjective complaints are disproportionate to the medical evidence; nor does he isolate particular complaints of pain and discuss the evidence suggesting that those complaints are not credible. In this circuit, these omissions are improper as a matter of law; they require that we reverse the AU's decision and remand for further proceedings. The AU must either accept Varney’s testimony or make specific findings rejecting it.

Section 404.1529 requires medical signs and findings of an impairment that could reasonably produce the alleged symptoms; a claimant’s statement alone cannot establish disability.

Cullivan v. Shalala · filed 1995-04-25

The Act essentially codifies the regulation, § 404.1529, and provides: An individual’s statement as to pain or other symptoms shall not alone be conclusive evidence of disability ...; there must be medical signs and findings, established by medically acceptable clinical or laboratory diagnostic techniques, which show the existence of a medical impairment that results from anatomical, physiological, or psychological abnormalities which could reasonably be expected to produce the pain or other symptoms alleged.

An ALJ may discount pain complaints that conflict with the evidence as a whole, but may not reject them merely because objective medical evidence does not fully support them.

Billie J. KNIGHT, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Shirley S. CHATER, Commissioner of Social Security, Defendant-Appellee · filed 1995-05-24(e)(3)

An ALJ may discount subjective complaints of pain that are inconsistent with the evidence as a whole. However, the ALJ may not disregard subjective complaints merely because they are not fully supported by objective medical evidence.

Section 404.1529(c)(2) bars rejecting a claimant’s statements about the intensity and persistence of pain solely because objective medical evidence does not substantiate them.

Pires v. Astrue · filed 2008-05-14(c)(2)

In considering a plaintiffs credibility, the ALJ may not reject evidence elucidated during the Avery inquiry' solely based on inconsistency with objective medical evidence.

Section 404.1529 directs the evaluation of pain complaints to consider daily activities, characteristics of the pain, aggravating factors, medication, and resulting functional limits.

Costa v. Astrue · filed 2008-07-17(c)(3)

Considerations capable of substantiating subjective complaints of pain include evidence of: (1) the claimant’s daily activities; (2) the location, duration, frequency, and intensity of the pain; (3) precipitating and aggravating factors; (4) the type, dosage, effectiveness and side effects of any medication taken to alleviate the pain or other symptoms; and (5) any other factors relating to claimant’s functional limitations and restrictions due to pain.

Section 404.1529(c) directs an ALJ evaluating claimed pain to consider factors including daily activities, pain medication, and treatment.

Smith v. Astrue · filed 2009-12-30(c)

Some of the factors that should be considered when evaluating claims regarding the nature and severity of the pain include the claimant’s daily activities, the type of medication taken to alleviate the pain, and the treatment received for the pain. Id. § 404.1529(c).

Section 404.1529 requires consideration of a claimant’s daily activities, pain, medication, and functional restrictions when evaluating subjective complaints.

Mains v. Saul · filed 2021-08-24

In addition to the claimant's prior work record, the Polaski factors include (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; and (5) functional restrictions. Polaski, 739 F.2d at 1322 ; see also 20 C.F.R. § 404.1529. Here, the ALJ considered the Polaski factors.

Section 404.1529 sets the standards an ALJ uses to evaluate a claimant’s complaints of pain.

Matney v. Apfel · filed 1998-10-23

It is clear that the ALJ’s decision comports with the appropriate standards for evaluating complaints of pain. See 20 C.F.R. § 404.1529 and Polaski v. Heckler, 739 F.2d 1320 (order), supplemented, 751 F.2d 943 (8th Cir.1984).

An ALJ need not make express findings on every pain evaluation factor when substantial evidence supports the assessment of the claimant’s complaints.

Zownir v. SSA · filed 2000-03-29(c)(3)

It is true that the ALJ’s decision does not provide express and specific findings for each factor set forth in the applicable regulations and case law. Notwithstanding this lack of specificity, I conclude that the ALJ’s adverse credibility determination is supported by substantial evidence of Zownir’s daily activities, her refusal to seek treatment and all of the medical evidence.

Section 404.1529 requires an ALJ to evaluate subjective symptoms using objective medical evidence and other relevant information, including daily activities, pain characteristics, treatment, and functional limitations.

McCarty v. Barnhart · filed 2004-01-05(c)(3)

The ALJ was required to evaluate McCarty’s subjective complaints of pain in determining whether she was disabled, see 20 C.F.R. § 404.1529, considering both the objective medical evidence, id. § 404.1529(b), as well as information provided by McCarty, her treating physician, or others, id. § 404.1529(c). ... In addition, the ALJ must evaluate her credibility in light of her (i) daily activities, (ii) the location, frequency, and duration of pain, (iii) precipitating and aggravating factors, (iv) the effects of medication, (v) treatment, (vi) other measures used to reheve the pain, and (vii) other factors concerning functional limitations. ... We conclude that the ALJ’s decision reflects consideration of the appropriate factors, see 20 C.F.R. § 404.1529(c)(3), and substantiates his conclusion that McCarty’s “allegations and reported limitations lack credibility to the extent that they purport to describe a condition of ‘disability.’”

Section 404.1529 requires the ALJ to evaluate reported symptoms using objective medical evidence and factors such as daily activities, medication, treatment, and pain relief measures.

Phillips v. Barnhart · filed 2004-03-10(a)

A claimant’s statements about pain symptoms do not alone establish disability. The Act requires objective medical evidence showing the existence of an impairment which could reasonably be expected to produce the claimed pain. 42 U.S.C. § 423(d)(5)(A); 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1529(a), 416.929(a); Hartranft v. Apfel, 181 F.3d 358 (3d Cir.1999). In evaluating symptoms including pain, the regulations provide that the ALJ consider a claimant’s daily activities; the type, dosage, and effectiveness of pain medication; the treatment, other than medication, received for relief of other symptoms; and any measures used to relieve pain or other symptoms. Id.

Section 404.1529(a) requires the agency to consider pain and other symptoms and how consistently they fit the objective medical evidence, while such statements alone do not establish disability.

Hollis v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2004-12-03(a)

Although subjective reports of pain cannot alone sustain a disability claim, the ALJ was indeed obligated to give appropriate consideration to Hollis’s testimony and explain the reason for finding it incredible in part. See 42 U.S.C. § 423(d)(5)(A), 20 C.F.R. § 404.1529(a) (providing that statements about pain or other symptoms will not alone establish disability but agency will consider those symptoms and the extent to which they can reasonably be accepted as consistent with the objective medical evidence).

Section 404.1529 requires the ALJ to evaluate alleged symptoms using factors such as daily activities, pain frequency, medication effects, treatment, and medical statements about symptom effects.

Earl-Buck v. Barnhart · filed 2006-02-13(c)

Moreover, I disagree with plaintiff that the ALJ erred in analyzing her credibility. The ALJ found that plaintiffs testimony of pain and limitation of function to the extent alleged were partially, but not fully, credible. (T. 22). In so concluding, the ALJ properly considered plaintiffs testimony and weighed it in accordance with various factors, including plaintiffs daily activities, the frequency of pain, the type, dosage, and side effects of medication, and other treatment that relieves pain. (T. 21). See 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1529(c); 416.929(c). Despite plaintiffs contention to the contrary, the ALJ set forth her reasons for discounting certain symptoms alleged by plaintiff, and she relied on medical evidence and statements from plaintiffs physicians to support her conclusion. See 20 C.F.R. § 404.1529(c)(4) (“We will consider ... statements by physicians about how your symptoms affect you.”).

Section 404.1529(c)(3) lists factors used to evaluate the intensity, persistence, and limiting effects of symptoms.

Patterson v. Barnhart · filed 2006-04-12(c)(3)

Rather, this is but one factor to consider, along with the claimant’s daily activities; the location, duration, frequency and intensity of the pain; precipitating and aggravating factors; the type, dosage, effectiveness and side effects of medication; treatment other than medication; any measures the claimant has used to relieve the pain or other symptoms; and functional limitations and restrictions. 20 C.F.R. § 404.1529(c)(3); see also SSR 96-7p.

Section 404.1529 requires a claimant alleging disabling pain to establish a medically determinable impairment capable of producing it, after which subjective complaints must be considered with the medical evidence.

Lewis v. Barnhart · filed 2006-09-26

When a plaintiff alleges disability resulting from pain, she must establish a medically determinable impairment that is capable of producing disabling pain. See Ripley, 67 F.3d at 556 (citing 20 C.F.R. § 404.1529). Once a medical impairment is established, the subjective complaints of pain must be considered along with the medical evidence in determining the individual’s work capacity. See id.

Section 404.1529 requires the disability evaluator to consider a claimant’s subjective pain when it is reasonably consistent with the medical evidence.

Hardin v. Barnhart · filed 2006-12-27

In addition to objective medical reports, the hearing officer’s determination of disability must take into account the subjective pain of the claimant that is reasonably consistent with the medical evidence. 20 C.F.R. § 404.1529; S.S.R. 96-7p.

Section 404.1529 requires evaluating subjective symptoms by considering their medical cause, intensity, persistence, and effect on the claimant's ability to work.

Thomas v. Barnhart · filed 2007-01-10(c)

In evaluating pain, the A.L.J. must first determine whether the plaintiff suffers from a medical impairment that could reasonably be expected to cause the alleged symptoms. Once the A.L.J. makes this determination, he or she must evaluate the intensity and persistence of the pain or symptom, and the extent to which it affects the individual’s ability to work. ... This analysis requires the ALJ to assess the plaintiffs credibility to determine the extent to which he or she is accurately stating the degree of pain and/or the extent to which he or she is disabled by it. See 20 C.F.R. § 404.1529(c).

Section 404.1529 governs how an adjudicator evaluates a claimant's symptoms, including pain, against objective medical and other evidence.

Stevens v. Barnhart · filed 2007-02-13

The ALJ considered Plaintiffs subjective complaints of pain and afforded the complaints some weight in finding that Plaintiff was not disabled and retained the residual functional capacity for a limited range of sedentary work (R. at 22-24). However, the ALJ noted Plaintiffs reported symptoms were not consistent with objective medical evidence and other evidence. See 20 C.F.R. § 404.1529 and 416.949, SSR 96-7p.

Section 404.1529(c)(3) requires an ALJ to consider specified factors when evaluating a claimant’s symptoms, including pain.

Stennett v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2007-03-01(c)(3)

In making a determination under this second prong of Duncan, an ALJ must consider several factors set forth in 20 C.F.R. § 404.1529(c)(3): Factors relevant to your symptoms, such as pain, which we will consider include: (i) Your daily activities; (ii) The location, duration, frequency, and intensity of your pain or other symptoms; ■ (in) 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.

Section 404.1529 provides factors for evaluating a claimant’s subjective complaints.

Schultz v. Barnhart · filed 2007-03-22

Although the ALJ never expressly cited Polaski (which is our preferred practice), the ALJ cited and conducted an analysis pursuant to 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1529 and 416.929, which largely mirror the Polaski factors. ... We conclude the ALJ adequately, if not expressly, applied the Polaski factors and discounted Schultz’s subjective complaints of pain.

Section 404.1529 provides the framework for evaluating subjective complaints of pain.

Schultz v. Michael J. Astrue, 1 Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2007-03-22

Although the ALJ never expressly cited Polaski (which is our preferred practice), the ALJ cited and conducted an analysis pursuant to 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1529 and 416.929, which largely mirror the Polaski factors.

Section 404.1529 requires consideration of all relevant evidence and medical support when evaluating a claimant’s pain and other symptoms.

Wannamaker v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2007-03-28

The regulation requires consideration of "all of the evidence presented, including information about your prior work record, your statements about your symptoms, evidence submitted by your treating, examining or consulting physician . . . and observations by our employees and other persons." ... Standing alone, a claimant’s statements about pain will not establish disability. Instead, "there must be medical signs and laboratory findings which show that you have a medical impairment(s) which could reasonably be expected to produce the pain or other symptoms alleged and which, when considered with all of the other evidence . . . would lead to a conclusion that you are disabled." ... The record indicates that the administrative law judge adhered to the regulatory requirements in his evaluation of Wannamaker’s pain and that substantial evidence exists to support the agency conclusion.

Section 404.1529 identifies daily activities and other symptom related factors as appropriate factors for evaluating credibility.

Baty v. Barnhart · filed 2007-06-13

After reviewing the record in its entirety, it is evident that the ALJ considered the appropriate factors, one of which is daily activities. ... 20 C.F.R. § 404.1529.

Section 404.1529(c) requires the ALJ to evaluate reported symptoms using all available evidence, including medical evidence, source opinions, claimant statements, and inconsistencies in the record.

Simmons v. Astrue · filed 2010-09-08(c)

Once an impairment is established, the ALJ will consider all available evidence including objective medical evidence, the opinions of a claimant’s treating, or nontreating sources, and statements by the claimant regarding their symptoms. ... Based on Simmons’ treating physicians’ notes, the objective medical evidence, the subjective evidence and the state agency medical consultants’ opinions, substantial evidence in the record supports the ALJ’s determination that the alleged intensity and severity of Simmons’ fatigue and other symptoms during periods of exacerbation was not entirely credible.

Section 404.1529(a) requires the ALJ to consider all symptoms, including pain, and whether alleged symptoms are consistent with objective medical evidence.

Smith v. Astrue · filed 2011-06-21(a)

The ALJ must take into account all symptoms, including pain. 20 C.F.R. § 404.1529(a). That said, the ALJ must also consider whether the alleged symptoms “can reasonably be accepted as consistent with the objective medical evidence.” Id.

Section 404.1529(b) requires the ALJ to consider whether a medically determinable impairment could reasonably produce the claimant’s alleged symptoms.

Kessler v. Colvin · filed 2014-09-17(b)

First, the ALJ must consider whether the claimant has a medically-determinable impairment that could reasonably be expected to produce the pain or symptoms alleged by the claimant.

Section 404.1529 requires the hearing officer to determine whether a medically determinable impairment could cause the alleged symptoms, then assess those symptoms against the medical and other evidence.

Deno v. Colvin · filed 2014-10-20

At the first step, the hearing officer “must decide whether the claimant suffers from a medically determinable impairment that could reasonably be expected to produce the symptoms alleged.” Id. (citing 20 C.F.R. § 404.1529(b)). ... Because the hearing officer adequately measured Deno’s subjective claims of pain against this objective medical evidence, then, the Court rules that the hearing officer’s determination that Deno’s claims were not credible was permissible.

Section 404.1529 requires the ALJ to determine whether a medically determinable impairment could produce the alleged symptoms, then evaluate those symptoms against the evidence.

Rousey v. Comm'r of Soc. Sec. · filed 2018-01-11

The regulations provide a two-step process for evaluating a claimant's subjective assertions of disability. At the first step, the ALJ must decide whether the claimant suffers from a medically determinable impairment that could reasonably be expected to produce the symptoms alleged. 20 C.F.R. § 404.1529(b). ... Here, the ALJ expressly acknowledged the applicability of the two-step process described above (Tr. 21) and followed it precisely.

Section 404.1529 governs the evaluation of a claimant’s reported symptoms, beginning with evidence of an underlying impairment that could reasonably produce them.

Grant v. Commissioner Social Security Administration · filed 2019-09-13

To determine whether a claimant’s testimony regarding subjective pain or symptoms is credible, an ALJ must perform two stages of analysis. Trevizo v. Berryhill, 871 F.3d 664, 678 (9th Cir. 2017); 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1529, 416.929. ... The ALJ’s first notable inconsistency was not a clear and convincing reason to reject her testimony.

Section 404.1529 allows an ALJ to evaluate reported symptoms in light of inconsistencies in the record.

Andrew v. Saul · filed 2021-06-22

However, the ALJ evaluated the symptoms as required by the regulations and circuit precedent, finding them unpersuasive, citing numerous inconsistencies in the record (Tr. 16-22). See 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1529, 416.929; SSR 16-3, 2017 WL 5180304; Luna v. Bowen, ... The Court finds the ALJ reasonably evaluated Plaintiff’s symptoms.

Section 404.1529 continues to govern evaluation of symptom allegations under the three-step Luna framework despite the change in terminology from credibility determinations.

Bonham v. Social Security Administration, Commissioner of · filed 2019-07-24

Therefore, the three-step framework set out in Luna, based on 20 C.F.R. § 404.1529 (2017) is still the proper standard to be used as explained in the regulations in effect on September 20, 2017, when this case was decided.

Section 404.1529(a) requires the ALJ to evaluate a claimant’s symptoms in light of objective medical evidence and other evidence.

Baker v. Saul · filed 2019-08-06(a)

The ALJ determined at step two that plaintiff’s statements concerning the intensity, persistence, and limiting effects were not consistent with medical evidence and other evidence in the record. ... Thus, the ALJ properly explained and supported her credibility determination with respect to plaintiff’s symptom testimony.

Section 404.1529’s rules for evaluating symptoms remained unchanged when SSR 16-3p removed the term “credibility” from the analysis.

Klopfenstein v. Berryhill · filed 2019-09-16

However, the regulations remain unchanged; “Our regulations on evaluating symptoms are unchanged.” SSR 16-3p, 2017 WL 5180304 (Oct. 25, 2017); 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1529, 416.929.

When an impairment could reasonably cause the alleged symptoms, subsection (c)(1) requires the ALJ to evaluate their intensity and persistence to determine how they limit the claimant’s capacity for work.

Kelly v. Saul · filed 2020-04-27(c)(1)

Where, as here, the ALJ concludes that the claimant’s impairments could reasonably be expected to cause his alleged symptoms, (R. at 25), the ALJ must then “evaluate the intensity and persistence of [the claimant’s] symptoms” in order ... to determine “how [the] symptoms limit [the claimant’s] capacity for work.” 20 C.F.R. § 404.1529(c)(1).

Section 404.1529 requires the ALJ to address a claimant’s reported symptoms when assessing residual functional capacity.

Fields v. Social Security Administration, Commissioner of · filed 2020-10-26

The ALJ must address the claimant’s reported symptoms when assessing her RFC.

Section 404.1529(c) requires the ALJ to consider daily activities, treatment, and other evidence when evaluating a claimant’s symptoms.

Lopez v. Saul · filed 2020-11-10(c)

The Step Five analysis includes a detailed assessment of the medical evidence, the claimant’s daily activities, prior work record, any functional restrictions and limitations, treatment for relief of symptoms, and information and observations by treating and examining symptoms and third parties regarding the nature and extent of the claimant’s symptoms. See 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1529, 416.929.

Section 404.1529 requires the ALJ to determine whether a medically determinable impairment could cause the alleged symptoms, then assess their intensity and persistence to determine how they limit the claimant’s ability to work.

Johnson v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2020-11-30(b), (c)

In assessing a claimant’s subjective symptoms, the ALJ considers a two-step analysis: whether there is a medically determinable impairment that could reasonably be expected to produce the symptoms alleged and then determine the intensity and persistence of the symptoms to determine the extent to which they limit the claimant’s capacity for work. 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1529(b), (c).

Section 404.1529 requires an ALJ to consider a claimant’s symptoms, including pain, in light of objective medical evidence and other evidence.

PENROSE v. COMMISSIONER OF SOCIAL SECURITY · filed 2020-12-23(a)

When making the RFC determination, the ALJ is required to: ... [C]consider all your symptoms, including pain, and the extent to which your symptoms can reasonably be accepted as consistent with the objective medical evidence and other evidence. ... 20 C.F.R. § 404.1529. ... Plaintiff’s argument is without merit. In a detailed and comprehensive decision, the ALJ set forth the medical evidence concerning all of Plaintiff’s claimed impairments, including that Plaintiff claimed he experienced vertigo.

Section 404.1529 requires an ALJ to assess a claimant’s symptoms against medical and other evidence, including treatment history and daily activities, when determining work limitations.

REEDY v. BERRYHILL · filed 2020-12-29(c)

The regulations set forth a process by which an ALJ is to consider a claimant's descriptions of her symptoms and assess the extent to which those symptoms can reasonably be accepted as consistent with the objective medical and other evidence of record. See 20 C.F.R. § 404.1529(a). ... Further, in formulating the RFC, the ALJ properly considered the objective medical evidence along with Reedy’s symptoms, work history, and daily activities.

Section 404.1529(c)(3) governs evaluation of a claimant’s symptoms and their effect on the ability to work.

Gonzalez v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2021-01-05(c)(3)

Pain or other symptoms may be important factors contributing to a disability claimant’s functional loss and affects a claimant’s ability to perform basic work activities where relevant medical signs or laboratory findings show the existence of a medically determinable impairment that could “reasonably” be expected to cause the associated pain or other symptoms. 20 C.F.R. § 404.1529(c)(3). ... The ALJ’s credibility assessment is therefore based on substantial evidence sufficiently accounted for in the ALJ’s residual functional capacity assessment of Plaintiff.

Section 404.1529(c) calls for evaluating symptoms in light of a claimant’s activities, pain and its effects, medication, and treatment.

Coaty v. Commissioner Social Security Administration · filed 2021-01-05(c)

Plaintiff’s conclusory assertion, without argument or evidence, that “[t]he ALJ improperly failed to evaluate each of the symptoms alleged [under the] the framework set forth in 20 C.F.R. § 404.1529(c),” is likewise without merit.

Section 404.1529(a) requires consideration of objective medical evidence and other evidence when evaluating how symptoms affect daily activities and the ability to work.

Rogers v. Saul · filed 2021-01-11(a)

In evaluating allegations of pain, SSR 16-3P directs ALJs to consider whether the symptoms are consistent with the objective medical evidence as well as other evidence in the record. 2017 WL 5180304, at *2; see also 20 C.F.R. § 404.1529(a) (explaining that the agency considers both “objective medical evidence and other evidence” in evaluating whether an impairment affects activities of daily living and the ability to work).

Section 404.1529 requires an ALJ to consider a claimant’s symptoms and daily activities and explain the treatment of allegations that affect the claimant’s ability to work.

Sprehe v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2021-01-20(c)(3)

An ALJ must consider a claimant’s statements about his or her symptoms, including pain, and how these symptoms affect the claimant’s activities of daily living and ability to work. ... This failure to properly analyze Plaintiff’s alleged need to take breaks requires remand.

Section 404.1529 requires an ALJ to consider how a claimant’s reported symptoms affect daily activities and ability to work, and to adequately explain a decision to discount that testimony.

Donley v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2021-02-03(a)

An ALJ must consider a claimant’s statements about his or her symptoms, including pain, and how these symptoms affect the claimant’s activities of daily living and ability to work. ... Although these are relevant examples, they do not form a “logical bridge” to the ALJ’s conclusion that his alleged fear of going outside was unsupported.

Section 404.1529 requires an ALJ to evaluate a claimant’s symptoms using the relevant factors and apply them to the claimant’s circumstances.

Camden v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2021-02-04

The ALJ did engage in a substantial discussion of that issue, listing the relevant factors contained in the applicable regulation and ruling (20 C.F.R. §404.1529 and SSR 16-3p) and considering how those factors applied to Plaintiff’s case. ... Since no such error undermining the ALJ’s determination on this issue has been demonstrated, Plaintiff’s statement of errors does not provide any basis upon which the Court could order a remand.

Section 404.1529 requires the adjudicator to determine whether a medically determinable impairment could cause the alleged symptoms, then assess their intensity, persistence, and effect on the claimant’s ability to work.

McQuaig v. Saul · filed 2021-04-20

When evaluating a claimant’s subjective complaints, a Law Judge must follow the two-step framework provided for in 20 C.F.R. § 404.1529 and SSR 13-3p, 2016 WL 1119029 (Mar. 16, 2016). ... Here, the court concludes that the Law Judge did not err in evaluating Plaintiff’s subjective complaints.

Section 404.1529(c) calls for consideration of daily activities, symptom frequency and intensity, medication, treatment, aggravating factors, and functional restrictions when evaluating symptoms.

Noel v. Saul · filed 2021-04-26(c)

These issues track some of the factors set out in the regulations, but the ALJ failed to explain how any of them were inconsistent with the symptoms that Claimant described.

Section 404.1529 requires an ALJ to consider impairment-related pain and other subjective symptoms at each step of the disability evaluation.

Darnelle Cheri Mason v. Saul · filed 2021-04-28(a), (d)

When determining disability, an ALJ is required to consider a claimant’s impairment-related pain and other subjective symptoms at each step of the sequential evaluation process. 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1529(a), 404.1529(d), 416.929(a), 416.929(d).

Section 404.1529 requires an ALJ to consider and discuss relevant factors and explain how they support the assessment of a claimant’s reported symptoms.

Lach v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2021-05-06

It is correct that the ALJ was not required to analyze any one particular factor. However, he was required to consider and discuss some of the regulatory factors and explain how those led to his conclusion that Plaintiff’s statements about his symptoms and limitations were not entirely consistent with the evidence, yet the ALJ failed to discuss any of the factors.

Section 404.1529 requires an ALJ to determine whether a medically determinable impairment could cause the alleged symptoms, then evaluate their intensity and persistence using the available evidence.

Clemons v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2021-05-14(b), (c)

The Commissioner has established a two-step inquiry that the ALJ must follow in order to properly evaluate a claimant’s contention of pain. ... It is clear to the Court that the ALJ here found that while Plaintiff's alleged pain is reasonably consistent with the medical conditions from which he suffers, the intensity and persistence of the alleged pain are unsubstantiated, rendering his subjective allegations not credible. This was not error.

Section 404.1529(c)(3) requires the ALJ to evaluate reported symptoms, including pain and medication side effects, in light of medical and other evidence.

Konya v. Barnhart · filed 2005-09-27(c)(3)

Pursuant to the regulations, the ALJ must consider the extent to which plaintiffs alleged symptoms can reasonably be accepted as consistent with objective medical and other evidence. 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1529, 416.929 (2003). ... Since the ALJ set forth a “reasoned basis, grounded in the record, for concluding that plaintiffs complaints were not credible,” her decision is supported by substantial evidence as required.

Section 404.1529 calls for a two-step assessment of a claimant’s testimony about pain and other symptoms.

Dulaney v. Commissioner Social Security Administration · filed 2019-09-17

In assessing a claimant’s testimony about subjective pain or the intensity of symptoms, the ALJ engages in a two-step analysis. 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1529, 416.929. ... Because three of these reasons are unsupported by substantial evidence in the record, the ALJ erred in discounting Plaintiff’s subjective symptom testimony.

Section 404.1529 uses the three-step Luna framework to evaluate a claimant’s alleged symptoms.

VanNorman v. Social Security Administration, Commissioner of · filed 2020-02-27

Therefore, the three-step framework set out in Luna, based on 20 C.F.R. § 404.1529 (2017) is still the proper standard to be used as explained in the regulations in effect on August 15, 2018, when this case was decided.

Section 404.1529(c)(3) allows an ALJ to evaluate reported pain in light of treatment, daily activities, and other evidence.

Miller v. Berryhill · filed 2020-04-14(c)(3)

These were legitimate reasons for ALJ Nagel to conclude Sherry’s shoulder pain was not as debilitating “as she described at the hearing,” R. 51; see 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1529(c)(3), 416.929(c)(3), and they are amply supported by the record as a whole, ... 2100.

Section 404.1529 requires an ALJ to consider a claimant’s pain and other subjective symptoms at each step of the disability evaluation.

Beeler v. Berryhill · filed 2020-05-14(a), (d)

When determining disability, an ALJ is required to consider a claimant’s impairment-related pain and other subjective symptoms at each step of the sequential evaluation process. 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1529(a), (d).

Section 404.1529 calls for consideration of relevant factors beyond objective medical evidence when reported symptoms suggest greater functional limits.

Burchette v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2020-09-23(c)(3)

Here, the ALJ considered plaintiff's “symptoms and the extent to which these symptoms can reasonably be accepted as consistent with the objective medical evidence and other evidence, based on the requirements of 20 CFR 404.1529 and 416.929 and SSR16-3p.” R. 24, ... At bottom, the ALJ’s rationale comports with statutory and regulatory requirements and is supported by substantial evidence.

Section 404.1529 requires an ALJ to assess how the intensity and persistence of a claimant’s symptoms limit work-related activities.

Parker v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2021-02-19

Second, the “intensity and persistence of those symptoms” are examined “to determine the extent to which the symptoms limit an individual’s ability to perform work-related activities.” Id.; 20 C.F.R. § 404.1529.

Section 404.1529 identifies treatment other than medication and other measures used to relieve symptoms as evaluation factors.

Pham v. Social Security Administration Commissioner · filed 2021-03-08

Social Security Regulations 20 C.F.R. § 404.1529 and 20 C.F.R. § 416.929 require the analysis of two additional factors: (1) “treatment, other than medication, you receive or have received for relief of your pain or other symptoms” and (2) “any measures you use or have used to relieve your pain or symptoms (e.g., lying flat on your back, standing for 15 to 20 minutes every hour, sleeping on a board, etc.).” However, under Polaski and its progeny, the Eighth Circuit has not yet required the analysis of these additional factors. See Shultz v. Astrue, 479 F.3d 979, 983 (2007). Thus, this Court will not require the analysis of these additional factors in this case.