20 C.F.R. § 404.1545

Section 404.1545(a)(2) requires an ALJ to consider non-severe impairments when assessing residual functional capacity.

Mufti v. Commissioner of the Social Security Administration · filed 2024-02-05(a)(2)

When an ALJ finds that a claimant has non-severe impairments, as happened here, the ALJ must consider those impairments when he or she assesses the claimant’s RFC.

Section 404.1545 requires an ALJ to consider medically determinable mental impairments when assessing residual functional capacity, even if they are non-severe at step two.

Ashcraft v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2024-02-14(a)(2)

Upon consideration, the court finds that despite finding that Plaintiff has medically determinable mental impairments at step two, the ALJ failed to adequately consider Plaintiff’s mental impairments in formulating his RFC at step four.

Section 404.1545 requires an RFC assessment to account for all medically determinable impairments, including non-severe mental impairments.

Simon v. Commissioner, Social Security Administration · filed 2024-02-15(a)(2)

While the former statement is true, the regulations require that all medically determinable impairments, severe and non-severe alike, must be accounted for in the RFC assessment.

Section 404.1545(a)(2) requires an ALJ to consider non-severe impairments when assessing residual functional capacity, but an impairment needs an RFC limitation only if it affects the claimant’s ability to work.

Yokosh v. O'Malley · filed 2024-02-20(a)(2)

And, although an ALJ is required to “consider” all impairments, including ones that are not “severe” when assessing a claimant’s RFC, 20 C.F.R. § 404.1545(a)(2), the agency’s regulations do not suggest that non-severe impairments must always result in corresponding RFC limitations. Instead, the ALJ must account for functional limitations caused by non-severe impairments in formulating the RFC assessment when those impairments affect the claimant’s work functionality. Accordingly, an RFC finding need not account for a non-severe impairment that does not affect a claimant’s ability to function at a job.

Section 404.1545(a)(2) requires an ALJ to consider the limiting effects of both severe and non-severe medically determinable impairments when assessing residual functional capacity.

Hampton v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2024-02-21(a)(2)

When formulating the RFC, Plaintiff correctly noted that the ALJ must consider the limiting effects of both severe and non-severe medically determinable impairments.

Section 404.1545 requires an ALJ to consider non-severe impairments when determining residual functional capacity.

Espada-Soto v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2024-02-29(a)(2)

The ALJ’s RFC stands because she considered Plaintiff’s diabetes mellitus.

Section 404.1545 does not require an RFC restriction merely because a claimant has a non-severe impairment; the record must support a work-related limitation.

Cobb v. O'Malley · filed 2024-03-01

The ALJ and Appeals Council were not required to limit Plaintiff’s RFC just because Plaintiff has a non-severe impairment of depression.

Section 404.1545(a)(2) requires the ALJ to consider functional limitations from all medically determinable impairments, including nonsevere mental impairments, when assessing residual functional capacity.

Miller v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2024-03-06(a)(2)

Even if the ALJ’s step-two severity determination were supported by substantial evidence – a determination I do not reach – I find that the ALJ still committed error by failing to account for or even address any functional limitations associated with plaintiff’s mental impairments in the RFC assessment.

Section 404.1545(e) requires the ALJ to consider nonsevere impairments when assessing residual functional capacity, but mild paragraph B ratings need not appear as RFC limitations when the evidence does not support them.

Smagala v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2024-03-12(e)

In evaluating an individual’s RFC, the ALJ considers impairments that are both “severe” and “not severe”, see 20 C.F.R. § 404.1545, “based on all the relevant medical and other evidence in [the claimant’s] case record,” 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520(e). ... Based on this record, the ALJ did not err by excluding plaintiff’s step 2 “paragraph B” criteria from the step 4 RFC determination.

Section 404.1545 requires the ALJ to consider medically determinable impairments, including non-severe impairments, when assessing residual functional capacity.

(SS) Mercado v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2024-03-06(a)(2)

The ALJ does not necessarily need to incorporate non-severe limitations into the RFC, but the ALJ must consider those limitations in the analysis underlying the formulation of the RFC.

Section 404.1545(a)(2) requires an RFC assessment to consider all medically determinable impairments, including those that are not severe.

Lewis v. Social Security Administration · filed 2024-03-12(a)(2)

In assessing the RFC, “the ALJ must consider the combined effect of all of the claimant’s medically determinable impairments, whether severe or not severe.” Wells v. Colvin, 727 F.3d 1061, 1065 (10th Cir. 2013); see also 20 C.F.R. § 404.1545(a)(2) (“We will consider all of [a claimant’s] medically determinable impairments of which we are aware, including . . . impairments that are ‘not severe’ . . . when we assess [a claimant’s] residual functional capacity.”). ... Thus, the Court agrees the ALJ inadequately considered Claimant’s non-severe mental impairment(s) in the RFC assessment.

Section 404.1545 requires consideration of nonsevere impairments in assessing residual functional capacity, but does not require a specific limitation for an impairment when substantial evidence supports its omission.

Horace v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2024-03-18(a)(2)

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

Section 404.1545(a)(2) requires the agency to consider all medically determinable impairments, including nonsevere impairments, when assessing residual functional capacity.

Brown v. Commissioner, Social Security Administration · filed 2024-03-22(a)(2)

The SSA Commissioner is to “consider all of [the claimant’s] medically determinable impairments of which [the SSA is] aware, including [the claimant’s] medically determinable impairments that are not ‘severe.’ ” 20 C.F.R. §404.1545(a)(2). ... In so ruling, I reject Plaintiff’s assertion that the ALJ’s ruling was a “total mischaracterization” of the record [Doc #20 pg. 1], and that a reconsideration of Claimant’s RFC in light of this error is required to assess whether substantial evidence supports the ALJ’s determination.

Section 404.1545(a)(2) requires the ALJ to consider all medically determinable impairments, including non-severe ones, when assessing residual functional capacity.

Figlietti v. Kijakazi · filed 2024-03-15(a)(2)

The ALJ must consider all relevant evidence in the record and all of a claimant’s medically determinable impairments, whether severe or not, when assessing a RFC.

An RFC assessment must consider all medically determinable impairments, including those that are not severe.

Queen v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2024-03-19(e)

Specifically, SSR 96-8p requires that an ALJ, when determining the RFC, must “consider limitations and restrictions imposed by all of an individual’s impairments, even those that are not ‘severe.’” SSR 96-8p, 1996 WL 374184, at *5 (S.S.A. July 2, 1996); see also 20 C.F.R. § 404.1545(e) (noting that the Commissioner will consider all of a claimant’s medically determinable impairments, even if they are not severe).

Section 404.1545(a)(2) requires an ALJ to consider limitations from medically determinable impairments in the RFC assessment, even when those impairments are non-severe.

Rivera v. Kijakazi · filed 2024-03-25(a)(2)

Nonetheless, there is nothing to indicate that the ALJ considered the limitations created by the mental impairments that it had already found existed in step two. See 20 C.F.R. § 404.1545(a)(2) (requiring the ALJ to consider non-severe impairments in the RFC); AR 19-20 (finding mild functional limitations in step two).

Section 404.1545(e) requires an RFC assessment to consider the limiting effects of all medically determinable impairments, including non-severe impairments.

King v. SSA · filed 2024-03-25(e)

The record does not reflect that the ALJ failed to account for the total limiting effects of King’s Ehlers-Danlos Syndrome in determining her RFC. Instead, he considered all of King’s medically determinable impairments, as well as any functional limitations, as required by law in reaching his conclusion.

Section 404.1545(a)(2) requires an ALJ to consider the limiting effects of all medically determinable impairments, including nonsevere mental impairments, when determining residual functional capacity.

Bossart v. Kijakazi · filed 2024-03-27(a)(2)

The ALJ did not properly consider Claimant’s mental impairments in the RFC determination, which cannot be “inconsequential” to the ALJ’s determination; accordingly, the ALJ’s finding Claimant’s mental impairments nonsevere was not harmless and remand is necessary.

Section 404.1545(a)(2) requires the ALJ to consider limitations from all impairments, including those found not severe, when determining residual functional capacity.

BROOKS v. KIJAKAZI · filed 2024-03-29(a)(2)

What matters is whether she properly accounted for any such issues in formulating Plaintiff’s RFC. In assessing a claimant’s RFC, the ALJ “must consider limitations and restrictions imposed by all of an individual’s impairments, even those that are not ‘severe.’” S.S.R. 96-8p, 1996 WL 374184, at *5 (S.S.A. July 2, 1996). See also 20 C.F.R. § 404.1545(a)(2).

A severe impairment must be considered when assessing residual functional capacity, but it does not automatically require a corresponding limitation.

Fisher v. Commissioner, Social Security Administration · filed 2024-03-27(a)(2)

The ALJ’s finding that an impairment is severe at step two does not mandate a corresponding RFC limitation at step four, because severity is a threshold question, while RFC requires a more detailed analysis of what the claimant is still capable of doing.

Section 404.1545(a)(2) requires an RFC assessment to consider medically determinable impairments, including those that are not severe.

Brown v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2024-03-28(a)(2)

Even if the ALJ concluded that Brown’s mental impairments were not severe, the ALJ still should have considered whether those impairments, in combination with Brown’s other impairments, could generate greater limitations in her RFC.

Section 404.1545(e) requires an ALJ to consider the limiting effects of all impairments, including those that are not severe, when determining residual functional capacity.

Fisher v. O'Malley · filed 2024-03-28(e)

An ALJ must consider all relevant evidence in the record to fashion a plaintiff's RFC, “including medical records, observations of treating physicians and others, and [the plaintiff's] own description of [their] limitations.” Anderson v. Shalala, 51 F.3d 777, 779 (8th Cir. 1995); see also 20 C.F.R. § 404.1545(e) (providing that the ALJ “will consider the limiting effects of all [a plaintiff's] impairment(s), even those that are not severe, in determining [their] residual functional capacity”). ... Despite only mild mental impairments, the ALJ nonetheless imposed limitations that Plaintiff be in a low stress job with simple instructions and limited personal interaction.

Section 404.1545(a)(2) requires an RFC assessment to reflect limitations from both severe and non-severe medically determinable impairments.

GUNTER v. COMMISSIONER OF SOCIAL SECURITY · filed 2024-03-28(a)(2)

Plaintiff is correct that both severe and non-severe limitations must be reflected in the RFC.

An ALJ assessing residual functional capacity considers all medically determinable impairments, including those found non-severe at step two.

Corliss v. Kijakazi · filed 2024-03-29(a)(2)

In making this assessment, the ALJ considers all the claimant’s medically determinable impairments, including any non-severe impairments identified by the ALJ at step two of his or her analysis.

Section 404.1545(a)(2) requires the ALJ to consider nonsevere impairments when assessing residual functional capacity, but consideration does not require a corresponding functional limitation.

Richardson v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2024-03-29(a)(2)

There is a distinction, however, between consideration of nonsevere mental impairments in formulating a claimant’s RFC and explicitly finding that those impairments translate to, and therefore ought to be included in, the functional limitations embodied in a claimant’s RFC.

Section 404.1545(a)(2) requires the ALJ to consider the limiting effects of impairments, including non-severe impairments, when assessing residual functional capacity.

Reeder v. Commissioner of the Social Security Administration · filed 2024-03-31(a)(2)

The ALJ must consider the limiting effects of an individual’s impairments, even those that are non-severe, and any related symptoms.19 ... As the Commissioner correctly notes, however, the ALJ devoted an entire section and paragraph to Plaintiff’s spinal complaints in the Step 3 analysis34 and incorporated them when generating Plaintiff’s extraordinarily restrictive physical RFC,35 which contemplates the use of a walker for ambulation notwithstanding Plaintiff’s physical activity that the ALJ observed in the record. There is no error in this regard.

Section 404.1545(a)(2) requires the ALJ to consider severe and non-severe impairments when assessing residual functional capacity.

Freeman v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2024-04-19(a)(2)

In addition, to comply with the regulations and avoid further error, the ALJ shall consider Plaintiff’s severe and non-severe impairments when assessing Plaintiff’s RFC. 20 C.F.R. § 404.1545(a)(2) (“We will consider all of your medically determinable impairments of which we are aware, including your medically determinable impairments that are not ‘severe’. . . when we assess your [RFC].”).

Section 404.1545(a)(2) requires the ALJ to consider all medically determinable impairments, including non-severe impairments, when assessing residual functional capacity.

Gaines v. Commissioner of Social Security Administration · filed 2024-04-29(a)(2)

In assessing a claimant’s RFC, the ALJ must consider the combined effect of all of the claimant’s medically determinable impairments, whether severe or not severe.

Section 404.1545(a)(2) requires the ALJ to consider all medically determinable impairments, including non-severe impairments, when assessing residual functional capacity.

Hurt v. Commissioner of Social Security Administration · filed 2024-04-29(a)(2)

In assessing a claimant’s RFC, the ALJ must consider the combined effect of all of the claimant’s medically determinable impairments, whether severe or not severe.

Section 404.1545(a)(2) requires an ALJ to consider all medically determinable impairments, including nonsevere ones, when assessing residual functional capacity.

Page v. Commissioner of Social Security Administration · filed 2024-05-06(a)(2)

Pursuant to governing authority, the ALJ must “consider all of [a claimant’s] medically determinable impairments,” including those “that are not ‘severe,’” in assessing the claimant’s RFC.

An RFC assessment must consider limitations from all medically determinable impairments, including those that are not severe.

Fitzgerald v. O'Malley · filed 2024-05-06(a)(1)

When assessing the RFC, the ALJ must “evaluate all limitations that arise from medically determinable impairments, even those that are not severe, and may not dismiss a line of evidence contrary to the ruling.”

An ALJ must consider all medically determinable impairments, including non-severe impairments, when assessing residual functional capacity.

Smith v. Social Security Administration, Commissioner of · filed 2024-05-08(a)(2)

An ALJ must consider all of a plaintiff’s medically determinable impairments, even those that are non-severe, in his RFC determina- tion.

Section 404.1545 requires the ALJ to consider non-severe impairments when assessing residual functional capacity, even if their limitations are not included in the final assessment.

Caramanna v. Commissioner Social Security Administration · filed 2024-05-15(a)(2)

The ALJ does not necessarily need to incorporate non-severe limitations into the RFC, but the ALJ must consider those limitations in the analysis underlying the formulation of the RFC.

Section 404.1545 requires an RFC assessment to consider all medically determinable impairments, including those that are not severe.

Daly v. O'Malley · filed 2024-05-20(a)(2)

Finally, to the extent that any error was committed at this step, it was harmless because the ALJ “considered all of the claimant’s medically determinable impairments, including those that are not severe, when assessing the claimant’s [RFC].” Tr. 24.

Section 404.1545 requires an RFC assessment to consider all medically determinable impairments, including those that are not severe.

(SS) Rodrigues v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2024-06-04(a)(2)

Although that is true, once the claim proceeds past step two the ALJ must only consider impairments that are medically determinable, whether severe or non-severe.

Section 404.1545(a)(2) requires an ALJ to consider the combined impact of all impairments, including non-severe impairments, when assessing residual functional capacity.

Miller v. Commissioner, SSA · filed 2024-06-05(a)(2)

Initially, we note that to the extent Ms. Miller challenges the ALJ’s finding that her headaches are a non-severe impairment, any error in that finding is harmless because the ALJ found she had other severe impairments and appropriately considered her headache symptoms and their resulting limitations in assessing her RFC. See Allman v. Colvin, 813 F.3d 1326, 1330 (10th Cir. 2016); Smith v. Colvin, 821 F.3d 1264, 1266-67 (10th Cir. 2016); see also 20 C.F.R. § 404.1545(a)(2) (requiring an ALJ to consider the combined impact of all impairments, including non-severe impairments, when assessing a claimant’s RFC).

Section 404.1545(a)(2) requires an RFC assessment to consider both severe and nonsevere medically determinable impairments.

(SS) Cox v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2024-07-01(a)(2)

The ALJ must consider both severe and nonsevere medically determinable impairments when determining the RFC. ... The Court finds Plaintiff has failed to show any error in the ALJ’s consideration of the limitations opined by Dr. Simonian and substantial evidence supports the RFC finding.

Section 404.1545(e) requires consideration of all a claimant’s impairments, including those found not severe, when formulating residual functional capacity.

Cash v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2024-07-02(e)

Significantly, all a claimant’s impairments, even impairments found not severe, must be considered when formulating an RFC. § 404.1545(e).

Section 404.1545(a)(1) and (2) requires the RFC assessment to consider medically determinable impairments and their related symptoms, even when the impairments are not severe.

Bauer v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2024-06-13(a)(1), (2)

This is because, in assessing the RFC, the ALJ considers only a claimant’s “impairment(s), and any related symptoms,” found to be medically determinable, even if not deemed severe.

Section 404.1545(a)(2) requires the ALJ to consider non-severe impairments when determining residual functional capacity.

COYNE v. COMMISSIONER OF SOCIAL SECURITY · filed 2024-06-17(a)(2)

Plaintiff is nonetheless correct in her assertion that the ALJ must consider even non-severe impairments in making the RFC determination.

Section 404.1545(a)(2) requires an ALJ to consider severe and non-severe impairments when assessing residual functional capacity.

Birner v. O'Malley · filed 2024-06-25(a)(2)

The error was not harmless. The ALJ was required to consider Birner’s severe and non-severe impairments in her RFC finding.

Section 404.1545(e) requires the ALJ to consider the limiting effects of non-severe impairments when determining residual functional capacity.

Vanderzwet v. Kijakazi · filed 2024-06-27(e)

However, even if an impairment is found non-severe at step two, the ALJ must still ‘consider the limiting effects of all [Plaintiff’s] impairment(s), even those that are not severe, in determining [RFC].’

Section 404.1545(a)(2) requires the ALJ to consider non-severe impairments when assessing residual functional capacity.

Johnson v. O'Malley · filed 2024-07-09(a)(2)

The ALJ considered and discussed Plaintiff’s non-severe mental impairments when assessing the RFC and did not merely rely upon his Step 2 findings. As a result, the RFC is supported by substantial evidence.

Section 404.1545(a)(2) requires the ALJ to consider all of a claimant’s impairments when assessing residual functional capacity, including impairments that are not severe.

Shaw v. O'Malley · filed 2024-07-11(a)(2)

In making the RFC finding the ALJ must consider all of the claimant’s impairments, including impairments that are not severe.

An ALJ must consider all of a claimant’s impairments, including those that are not severe, when determining residual functional capacity.

Freed v. O'Malley · filed 2024-07-29(a)(2)

In making the RFC finding the ALJ must consider all of the claimant’s impairments, including impairments that are not severe.

Section 404.1545 requires an ALJ to consider limitations from severe and non-severe impairments when assessing residual functional capacity.

Le Vitre v. O'Malley · filed 2024-07-10(a)(2)

RFC is defined as the most a claimant can do despite his physical and mental limitations. 20 C.F.R. § 404.1545(a). This includes limitations arising from his non-severe impairments as well as his severe impairments. See 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1523, 404.1545(a)(2).

Section 404.1545(a)(2) requires the ALJ to consider limitations from all medically determinable impairments, including non-severe impairments, when assessing residual functional capacity.

Pavao v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2024-07-12(a)(2)

The pertinent inquiry is not whether the non-severe impairments should have been classified as severe, but instead whether the ALJ considered limitations from those impairments at the later steps of the sequential analysis, in determining Plaintiff’s RFC.

Section 404.1545(a)(2) requires the ALJ to consider severe and non-severe medically determinable impairments when assessing residual functional capacity.

Sutton v. O'Malley · filed 2024-08-01(a)(2)

Indeed, when determining a claimant’s RFC at step four, the ALJ must consider both severe and non-severe MDIs.

An ALJ assessing residual functional capacity must consider the effects of every medically determinable impairment, including those that are not severe.

Haines v. Kijakazi · filed 2024-07-11(a)(2)

When assessing RFC, an ALJ considers the effects of each medically determinable impairment, including those that are not severe. 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1545, 416.945.

Section 404.1545(a)(2) requires the ALJ to consider medically determinable impairments and their effects on a claimant’s ability to work when assessing residual functional capacity.

Robbins v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2024-07-24(a)(2)

Here, there is ample medical evidence demonstrating an increase in pain that may affect Robbins’s functional capacity but no corresponding analysis in the ALJ’s decision regarding the impact, if any, on Robbins’s ability to walk or stand.

Section 404.1545(a)(2) requires an ALJ to consider all medically determinable impairments, including non-severe impairments, when assessing residual functional capacity.

Flick v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2024-07-23(a)(2)

Regardless of whether an impairment qualifies as severe or non-severe at step two, an ALJ still must consider the impact of all medically determinable impairments in assessing the RFC.

Section 404.1545(a)(2) requires the ALJ to consider mild mental impairments when assessing residual functional capacity, even if the ALJ includes no mental limitations in the final assessment.

Strock v. O'Malley · filed 2024-07-25(a)(2)

While the ALJ was not obligated to include any mental limitations in Plaintiff’s RFC, he was required to consider Plaintiff’s mild mental impairments in assessing her RFC.

Section 404.1545(e) requires the ALJ to consider the limiting effects of all impairments, including nonsevere impairments, when assessing a claimant’s ability to work.

Turner v. SSA · filed 2024-08-06(e)

“And once an ALJ finds that a claimant has at least one severe impairment at step two of the disability analysis, the ALJ must then ‘consider the limiting effects of all [the claimant’s] impairment(s), even those that are not severe’ in evaluating the claimant’s ability to work in step four.” Hedges v. Comm'r of Soc. Sec., 725 F. App'x 394, 395 (6th Cir. 2018) (citing 20 C.F.R. § 404.1545(e)). Here, the ALJ found that Turner had some severe impairments. “The fact that some of [the claimant's] impairments were not deemed to be severe at step two is therefore legally irrelevant.” Anthony v. Astrue, 266 F. App’x 451, 457 (6th Cir. 2008).

An ALJ must evaluate mental impairments when determining residual functional capacity, but need not include a mental limitation when the evidence shows it does not affect the claimant’s ability to work.

Coons v. O'Malley · filed 2024-08-07

This Court holds that the ALJ properly appraised Plaintiff’s mental limitations while formulating an appropriate RFC. Indeed, he spent a considerable amount of time explaining how he weighed the evidence when formulating the RFC. The absence mental health limitations in the final RFC does not demonstrate that the ALJ failed to evaluate those limitations, but rather indicates that the ALJ did not find those limitations impacted the ultimate RFC limitations.

Section 404.1545(e) requires an ALJ to consider medically determinable impairments, including nonsevere impairments, when assessing residual functional capacity.

Morris v. Social Security Administration · filed 2024-08-22(e)

This is critical because, once the ALJ identifies a severe impairment and proceeds past step two, the labeling of an impairment as severe or non-severe has no legal significance; the medical record as a whole provides the basis for the determinations at steps three and four. See 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1545(e), 416.945; Social Security Ruling (“SSR”) 96-8p (the ALJ will consider all medically determinable impairments, even those that are non-severe, when assessing residual functional capacity). In this case, the ALJ identified at least one severe impairment and proceeded to the RFC analysis wherein the ALJ considered Morris’s depression, along with his other medically determinable impairments. (Tr. at 15–17). As a result, there is no error.

Section 404.1545(a)(2) requires the ALJ to consider all medically determinable impairments, including non-severe impairments, when assessing residual functional capacity.

Minarsky v. O'Malley · filed 2024-08-29(a)(2)

In making this assessment, the ALJ must consider all the claimant’s medically determinable impairments, including any non-severe impairments identified by the ALJ at Step 2 of his or her analysis.

An RFC assessment must consider nonsevere impairments, but treatment for a condition alone does not establish a work-related limitation.

Mosna v. Kijakazi · filed 2024-09-09(a)(2)

It is not enough that L.R.M. point to evidence indicating she was treated for these conditions, she must also cite to evidence in the record explaining how these conditions affect her ability to work.

Section 404.1545(a)(2) requires the ALJ to consider all medically determinable impairments, including those that are not severe, when formulating residual functional capacity.

Yerdon v. Kijakazi · filed 2024-08-23(a)(2)

In formulating a claimant’s RFC, the ALJ “consider[s] all of [the claimant’s] medically determinable impairments of which [the ALJ is] aware, including [the claimant’s] medically determinable impairments that are not ‘severe’ . . . .” 20 C.F.R § 404.1545(a)(2); see also 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1545(e), 416.945(a)(2), 416.945(e); Social Security Ruling (“SSR”) 96-8p, 1996 WL 374184, at *5 (S.S.A. July 2, 1996).

Section 404.1545 requires the ALJ to consider the combined effects of severe and non-severe impairments when assessing residual functional capacity.

Lyles v. Kijakazi · filed 2024-09-06(a)(2)

Finally, even if the ALJ erred by finding that Plaintiff’s tinnitus, bilateral pes planus, and anxiety and depression were non-severe impairments at step two, any such error was harmless because the ALJ preceded to the next steps in the sequential evaluation and considered the combined effects of all impairments, both severe and non-severe, in formulating his RFC.

Section 404.1545 requires an RFC assessment to consider all medically determinable physical and mental impairments, including non-severe ones.

Drinen v. Commissioner, Social Security Administration · filed 2024-09-09(a)(2)

The Court cannot agree with Defendant’s position insofar that it can be interpreted as saying that the ALJ was not required to account for Plaintiff’s non-severe mental limitations in the RFC. After all, the RFC analysis requires consideration of all of a claimant’s medically determinable physical and mental impairments, both severe and non-severe. 20 C.F.R. § 404.1545(a)(2), (b)–(c), (e); SSR 96-8p at *5.

Section 404.1545(a)(2) requires the ALJ to consider limitations from all impairments, including nonsevere impairments, when assessing residual functional capacity.

Laporte v. O'Malley · filed 2024-09-12(a)(2)

In formulating the RFC, the ALJ is required to consider the limiting effects of all impairments, including those which are non-severe. ... The ALJ adequately discussed and evaluated Dr. Gonzales’s opinion and included all of Plaintiff’s credible mental limitations in the RFC.

Section 404.1545(e) requires an ALJ to consider all of a claimant’s impairments, including nonsevere impairments, when assessing residual functional capacity.

Beauerle v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2024-09-24(e)

Applying these principles here, the Court concludes that the ALJ’s discussion was sufficient to comport with 20 C.F.R. § 404.1545(e) and the requirement that an ALJ consider all of a claimant’s impairments in formulating that claimant’s RFC, citing 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1520(e), 404.1545 and SSR 96-8p.

Section 404.1545(a)(2) requires consideration of limitations from all impairments, including nonsevere impairments, when formulating residual functional capacity.

KACZYNSKI v. O'MALLEY · filed 2024-09-25(a)(2)

The real issue is whether the ALJ properly accounted for the limitations caused by all of Plaintiff’s impairments, even those that were not severe, in formulating the RFC.

Section 404.1545(a)(2) requires an RFC assessment to consider how non-severe mental impairments affect a claimant’s ability to work.

McEachin v. Kijakazi · filed 2024-09-26(a)(2)

The Court holds that the ALJ erred in failing to assess how Plaintiff’s mental impairments may have impacted her ability to perform past work in light of the ALJ’s determination at step two that she suffered from severe physical impairments.

Section 404.1545(a)(2) requires the ALJ to consider all medically determinable impairments when assessing residual functional capacity, including non-severe impairments.

Miller v. Kijakazi · filed 2024-09-26(a)(2)

In making this assessment, the ALJ considers all the claimant’s medically determinable impairments, including any non-severe impairments identified by the ALJ at step two of his or her analysis.

Section 404.1545(a)(2) requires an ALJ to consider medically determinable impairments, including non-severe impairments, together when assessing residual functional capacity.

Colon Marrero v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2024-09-26(a)(2)

As such, the ALJ committed reversible error by failing to discuss Colon’s depression in combination with her other determinable impairments at Step Four. See §404.1545(a)(2).

An RFC assessment must consider limitations from non-severe impairments, but need not include limitations the record does not warrant.

Velasquez v. O'Malley · filed 2024-09-27(e)

“The ALJ is required to consider all of the limitations imposed by the claimant’s impairments, even those that are not severe.” ... Here, there were no limitations related to Plaintiff’s carpel tunnel syndrome included in the RFC because no limitations were warranted.

Section 404.1545(e) requires the RFC assessment to account for limitations from all medically determinable impairments, including non-severe mental impairments.

Music v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2024-09-27(e)

While a step two error may be harmless if the ALJ adequately considers all impairments at step four, the ALJ must ensure the RFC reflects all of the claimant’s medically determinable impairments. 20 C.F.R. § 404.1545(e). Here, the ALJ’s omission of any mental health-related limitations in the RFC rendered it incomplete, therefore, the ALJ’s step two error was not harmless.

Section 404.1545(e) requires an RFC assessment to account for the limiting effects of all medically determinable impairments, including non-severe impairments.

Neela v. Kijakazi · filed 2024-09-30(e)

That is, an RFC must account for all of a claimant’s medically determinable impairments (whether severe or non-severe) and must reflect the total limiting effects of all such impairments. ... In this case, the ALJ’s RFC formulation failed to discuss any limitations for Plaintiff’s mental impairments, and thus, were incomplete. The ALJ’s failure was legally erroneous because it affected the hypothetical questions posed to the Vocational Expert. Remand on this issue is, therefore, required.

Section 404.1545(a)(2) requires the ALJ to consider non-severe impairments, including mild mental limitations, when assessing residual functional capacity.

Alva v. Kijakazi · filed 2024-09-30(a)(2)

In sum, the ALJ erred by failing to address Plaintiff’s non-severe mental impairments, and specifically the mild mental limitations he found, in formulating Plaintiff’s RFC.

Section 404.1545(e) requires consideration of limitations from all impairments, including non-severe impairments, when assessing residual functional capacity.

Rykse v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2024-09-30(e)

Once the ALJ determines that a claimant suffers from at least one severe impairment, the ALJ “will consider the limiting effects of all [the claimant’s] impairment(s), even those that are not severe, in determining [the claimant’s] residual functional capacity”. 20 C.F.R. § 404.1545(e). ... Here, the ALJ evaluated plaintiff’s RFC consistent with 20 C.F.R. § 404.1545(e).

Section 404.1545(e) requires the ALJ to consider non-severe impairments when determining residual functional capacity.

Tyo v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2024-09-30(e)

Even if there was an error, then, the ALJ's failure to consider Plaintiff's mental impairments as “severe” at Step 2 of the sequential analysis, will not necessarily require reversal or remand, so long as the ALJ also reasonably considered all the impairments (severe and non-severe) in determining Plaintiff’s RFC. The ALJ failed to do so here.

Section 404.1545(e) requires the residual functional capacity assessment to reflect all medically determinable impairments, including those that are not severe.

Burney v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2024-10-18(e)

While an error at step two may be harmless if all impairments are accounted for in the RFC, the RFC must reflect all medically determinable impairments, whether or not they are severe.

Section 404.1545(a)(2) requires an ALJ to consider non-severe medically determinable impairments when assessing residual functional capacity, but does not require expressly incorporating non-severe mental impairments already considered at Step Two.

Dial v. O'Malley · filed 2024-10-11(a)(2)

An administrative law judge (“ALJ”) determining the residual functional capacity (“RFC”) of a claimant must consider “medically determinable impairments,” including ones that are not “severe.” 20 C.F.R. § 404.1545(a)(2). But an ALJ need not expressly incorporate non-severe mental impairments already considered and acknowledged at Step Two of the required five-part analysis into an RFC.

Section 404.1545(a)(2) requires the ALJ to consider all medically determinable impairments, including non-severe impairments, when assessing residual functional capacity.

Vazquez v. Kijakazi · filed 2024-10-25(a)(2)

In making this assessment, the ALJ considers all the claimant’s medically determinable impairments, including any non-severe impairments identified by the ALJ at step two of his or her analysis.

Section 404.1545(a)(2) requires the ALJ to consider all medically determinable impairments when assessing residual functional capacity, including impairments found non-severe at step two.

Serdyuk v. Kijakazi · filed 2024-10-28(a)(2)

In making this assessment, the ALJ considers all the claimant’s medically determinable impairments, including any non-severe impairments identified by the ALJ at step two of his or her analysis.

Residual functional capacity must account for a claimant’s limitations, including limitations from impairments that are not severe.

Kessler v. O'Malley · filed 2024-11-14(a)(1)

The ALJ “must incorporate a claimant’s limitations,” including those that are not severe, in developing the RFC.

Section 404.1545(a)(2) requires the ALJ to consider all medically determinable impairments when assessing residual functional capacity, including impairments deemed nonsevere.

Walls v. Commissioner of Social Security Administration · filed 2024-11-15(a)(2)

In crafting a claimant’s RFC, the ALJ must consider all his medically determinable impairments, even those not deemed severe.

Section 404.1545(a)(2) requires the ALJ to consider nonsevere impairments when assessing residual functional capacity, but a functional limitation does not automatically require a workplace restriction.

Martinez v. Commissioner, Social Security Administration · filed 2024-11-27(a)(2)

In making an RFC determination, the ALJ must consider all the claimant’s impairments, including impairments that are not severe. 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1545(a)(2), 416.945(a)(2). ... Functional limitations are not the same as workplace limitations, and even a moderate limitation in a particular functional area does not always translate to a corresponding RFC limitation. ... Accordingly, the Court finds no error in the ALJ’s consideration of Plaintiff’s nonsevere mental impairments.

Section 404.1545(a)(2) requires an ALJ to consider both severe and non-severe limitations when assessing residual functional capacity.

Hecker v. O'Malley · filed 2024-11-13(a)(2)

The ALJ is required to address all limitations, both severe and non-severe, in determining the claimant’s RFC. See 20 C.F.R. § 404.1545(a)(2); see also Loader v. Berryhill, 722 F. App’x 653, 654–55 (9th Cir. 2018) (finding that the ALJ erred by failing to discuss a non-severe impairment when assessing the claimant’s RFC).

Section 404.1545(e) requires the ALJ to consider all impairments, severe and non-severe, when assessing residual functional capacity.

Ballou v. SSA · filed 2024-11-15(e)

Indeed, the regulations require that, once the ALJ determines that a claimant has at least one severe impairment, the ALJ must consider all impairments – severe and non-severe – in the remaining steps. 20 C.F.R. § 404.1545(e).

An RFC assessment must account for limitations caused by a non-severe impairment when they affect the claimant’s ability to work.

Stallings v. O'Malley · filed 2024-11-18(a)(1)

The regulations provide that when formulating the RFC finding, the ALJ must account for functional limitations caused by non-severe impairments when those impairments affect the claimant’s work functionality. See 20 C.F.R. § 404.1545 (“Your impairment(s), and any related symptoms, such as pain, may cause physical and mental limitations that affect what you can do in a work setting.”) (emphasis added).

Section 404.1545(a)(2) requires an ALJ to consider medically determinable impairments when assessing residual functional capacity, even if they are not severe.

LaRose v. OMalley · filed 2024-12-02(a)(2)

First, an ALJ is required to consider an MDI at step four of the sequential analysis regardless of whether the impairment is deemed “severe.”

An RFC assessment must consider non-severe mental impairments, but a mild impairment does not necessarily require a mental limitation in the RFC.

Wade v. Kijakazi · filed 2024-12-12(a)

The fact that the ALJ concluded for purposes of step two that Edward W.’s mental impairments were “mild” does not mean that the RFC must include mental functioning limitations. ... Rather, it simply requires the ALJ to assess these non-severe mental impairments in the context of determining an appropriate RFC.

Section 404.1545(a)(2) requires an ALJ to consider non-severe mental impairments when assessing residual functional capacity.

Kalbacher v. Kijakazi · filed 2025-01-02(a)(2)

Having concluded that the ALJ failed to adequately consider Ms. Kalbacher’s non-severe mental impairments when calculating her RFC, the court remands the case so that the ALJ may revisit his Step Four analysis.

Section 404.1545(a)(2) requires an RFC assessment to account for limitations from both severe and non-severe impairments.

Courts v. Social Security Administration · filed 2025-01-15(a)(2)

Specifically, an RFC determination must account for limitations imposed by both severe and non-severe impairments. ... The ALJ failed to properly account for the limiting effects of Claimant’s migraine headaches.

Section 404.1545 requires the ALJ to consider nonsevere medically determinable impairments when assessing residual functional capacity and explain how they were considered.

Burleson v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2025-01-24(a)(2)

But there’s no mention of depression in the RFC discussion, let alone how it affects Ms. Burleson, if at all, alongside her other impairments, or whether her RFC was adjusted to account for depression. Under the circumstances, such an omission constitutes an error requiring a remand.

Section 404.1545(e) requires the ALJ to consider the limiting effects of impairments, including non-severe impairments, when determining residual functional capacity.

Watts v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2025-01-23(e)

Here, the ALJ acknowledges the plaintiff’s history of Achilles tendinitis and peripheral neuropathy, yet the ALJ did not consider the limiting effects of these impairments – whether severe or non-severe – in determining the RFC, and therefore, the case must be remanded.

Section 404.1545(a)(2) requires an ALJ to consider nonsevere impairments when assessing residual functional capacity; statements that the ALJ considered all limitations can suffice when supported by the record.

Napier v. Comm'r of Soc. Sec. · filed 2025-02-07(a)(2)

The record clearly demonstrates that the ALJ adequately accounted for Napier’s mental impairments in formulating her residual functional capacity. ... Considering the substantial evidence supporting the ALJ’s findings that Napier’s limitations were no more than mild and the ALJ’s repeated statements that it took all of Napier’s limitations into account, we hold that the ALJ adequately accounted for Napier’s limitations in the residual functional capacity analysis.

Section 404.1545(e) requires consideration of all medically determinable impairments, including nonsevere impairments, when assessing residual functional capacity.

Thomas v. Commissioner, Social Security Administration · filed 2025-02-14(e)

Indeed, the Social Security Regulations require that all medically determinable impairments, severe and non-severe, must be considered in the RFC assessment. See McFerran v. Astrue, 437 F. App’x 634, 638 (10th Cir. 2011) (citing 20 C.F.R. § 404.1545(e)).

An ALJ must consider limitations from all of a claimant’s impairments, including nonsevere impairments, when assessing residual functional capacity.

Hardin v. Dudek · filed 2025-02-25(a)(2)

The ALJ must consider the combined effects of the limitations imposed by a claimant’s impairments, even those that are not severe.

Section 404.1545(a)(2) requires an ALJ to consider the limiting effects of both severe and nonsevere impairments when assessing residual functional capacity.

King v. Dudek · filed 2025-02-28(a)(2)

And after step two, the ALJ must consider the limiting effects of both severe and nonsevere impairments.

Section 404.1545 defines residual functional capacity as the most work a claimant can perform despite her limitations; the assessment must account for limitations from non-severe impairments.

Hansen v. O'Malley · filed 2025-02-13(a)(1)

Plaintiff argues that even if the migraines are non-severe, the ALJ still needed to consider them in determining her RFC. The ALJ did exactly that in a thorough discussion of the medical and testimonial evidence of record. R. 354-56, 359-67. A claimant’s RFC is the maximum work that she can perform despite any limitations.

Section 404.1545 requires the ALJ to consider the limiting effects of all medically determinable impairments, including non-severe impairments, when assessing residual functional capacity.

Wood v. O'Malley · filed 2025-02-13(a)(1)-(3), (e)

The ALJ must consider the limiting effects of all of Plaintiff’s impairments, whether severe or not, when fashioning the RFC. Carmickle, 533 F.3d at 1164; Robbins, 466 F.3d at 883; 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1545(a)(1)-(3), and (e); SSR 96-8p. The ALJ was therefore required to consider Plaintiff’s complaints of pain with sitting, even if non-severe, and the records attributing tailbone pain to Ehlers-Danlos syndrome, which the ALJ found to be a severe medically determinable impairment. The ALJ did not do so here.

An ALJ must consider non-severe impairments when assessing residual functional capacity, but need not include a functional limitation for every mild mental impairment.

(SS) Urzua v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2025-02-20(e)

While these regulations require the ALJ to consider the effect of all plaintiff’s impairments in formulating the RFC, they do not require him to translate every non-severe impairment into a functional limitation in the RFC. ... Here, the ALJ’s incorporation of the mild mental limitations assessed at step two was more than “mere boilerplate” and legally sufficient.

Section 404.1545(a)(2) requires the ALJ to consider all medically determinable impairments, including non-severe impairments, when assessing residual functional capacity.

Hammond v. Kijakazi · filed 2025-02-27(a)(2)

In making this assessment, the ALJ considers all of the claimant’s medically determinable impairments, including any non-severe impairments identified by the ALJ at step two of his or her analysis.

Section 404.1545(a)(2) requires an ALJ to consider all medically determinable impairments, including non-severe impairments, when assessing residual functional capacity.

Moreno v. Kijakazi · filed 2025-02-27(a)(2)

In making this finding, the ALJ must consider all the claimant’s medically determinable impairments, including those that are non-severe.

An RFC must account for limitations from all impairments, including those found nonsevere at step two.

Soto v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2025-03-04

The Appeals Council’s unexplained election not to include limitations in the RFC resulting from the shoulder issue is error necessitating remand for reconsideration.

Section 404.1545 requires the ALJ to consider all medically determinable impairments, including non-severe impairments, when assessing residual functional capacity.

Lee v. O'Malley · filed 2025-03-10(a)(2)

In making this assessment, the ALJ considers all of the claimant’s medically determinable impairments, including any non-severe impairments identified by the ALJ at step two of his or her analysis.

Section 404.1545 requires the ALJ to consider how both severe and non-severe impairments affect a claimant’s capacity to work when assessing residual functional capacity.

Newsome v. Kijakazi · filed 2025-03-12(a)(2)

If the ALJ determines that the claimant has at least one severe impairment or combination of impairments, the ALJ must consider how the claimant’s severe and non-severe impairments impact a claimant’s physical and mental capacities while working.

Section 404.1545(a)(2) requires an RFC to include limitations from all medically determinable impairments, including non-severe impairments.

Klahr v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2025-03-14(a)(2)

A claimant’s RFC includes limitations for all medically determinable impairments, including non-severe impairments. 20 C.F.R. § 404.1545(a)(2).

Section 404.1545(a)(2) requires an ALJ to consider non-severe mental limitations when assessing residual functional capacity.

Strickland v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2025-03-14(a)(2)

So too here, because the ALJ’s RFC analysis, apart from a passing reference to plaintiff’s ability to per- form everyday tasks, does not even mention the mild mental lim- itations found at step two. This constitutes legal error.

Section 404.1545(a)(2) requires the ALJ to consider all medically determinable impairments, including non-severe impairments, when assessing residual functional capacity; boilerplate language does not satisfy that requirement.

Antosy v. DUDEK · filed 2025-03-14(a)(2)

The boilerplate language utilized by the ALJ in discussing (or failing to discuss) the import of Plaintiff’s mild limitations does not satisfy the requirement contained in the social security regulations that the ALJ consider all impairments, even non-severe ones, in formulating a claimant’s RFC.

Section 404.1545(a)(2) requires an ALJ to consider nonsevere impairments when assessing residual functional capacity, but does not necessarily require a detailed discussion of each one.

Dollar v. Commissioner, Social Security Administration · filed 2025-03-19(a)(2)

What is clear is that the regulations require the ALJ to consider non-severe impairments in formulating the RFC, but do not necessarily require the ALJ to include a detailed narrative discussion of each non- severe impairment in her RFC explanation.

Section 404.1545(a)(2) requires consideration of all medically determinable impairments, including nonsevere ones, when assessing residual functional capacity.

Morris v. Commissioner of the Social Security Administration · filed 2025-03-24(a)(2)

An ALJ must consider the limiting effect of all impairments, including non-severe ones, in assessing a claimant’s RFC.

Section 404.1545(a)(2) requires consideration of medically determinable impairments, including nonsevere impairments, when assessing residual functional capacity.

PYFFER v. KIJAKAZI · filed 2025-03-26(a)(2)

The distinction between a non-severe impairment and an impairment that is not medically determinable is critical, because only the former must be considered in formulating the RFC assessment.

Section 404.1545(a)(2) requires an ALJ to consider all medically determinable impairments when assessing residual functional capacity, including impairments that are not severe.

Janey v. O'Malley · filed 2025-03-26(a)(2)

Because Plaintiff made the threshold showing that several of her impairments were severe, the ALJ continued with the sequential evaluation process and properly considered all impairments when determining Plaintiff's RFC.

Section 404.1545 requires consideration of nonsevere mental impairments when assessing residual functional capacity; mental restrictions need not be included when the findings support their omission.

Cutchineal v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2025-03-26(a)(2)

Having made all of these findings particularly regarding Plaintiff’s mental symptoms or lack thereof, the ALJ was not obligated to include any mental limitations in the RFC.

An ALJ must consider all medically determinable impairments, including nonsevere impairments, when assessing residual functional capacity.

Litwiller v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2025-03-31(a)(2)

Pursuant to 20 C.F.R. § 404.1545(a)(2), an ALJ must consider all of a claimant’s medically determinable impairments, including medically determinable impairments that are not severe, when assessing a claimant’s RFC.

Section 404.1545(e) requires an ALJ to consider limitations from all impairments, including non-severe impairments, when assessing residual functional capacity.

Jones v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2025-03-27(e)

Under SSR 96-8p, an ALJ must “consider limitations and restrictions imposed by all of an individual’s impairments, even those that are not ‘severe.’” SSR 96-8p, 1996 WL 374184, at *5 see also 20 C.F.R. § 404.1545(e). ... And so the Court finds that the ALJ properly considered Plaintiff’s impairments in combination and that any error at step two is harmless.

Section 404.1545(e) requires the ALJ to consider the limiting effects of all impairments, including non-severe impairments, when assessing residual functional capacity.

Havice v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2025-03-31(e)

It is well-settled that in evaluating a claimant’s RFC, an ALJ must consider the limiting effects of all impairments, even those that are not severe.

Section 404.1545 requires an RFC assessment to consider all medically determinable impairments, including non-severe impairments.

Gonzalez-Nunez v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2025-03-31(a)(2)

In determining an RFC, all recorded medically determinable impairments that are suffered by claimant are considered, including non-severe impairments.

Section 404.1545(a)(2) requires an ALJ to consider every medically determinable impairment when assessing residual functional capacity, including non-severe impairments.

Traylor v. Social Security Administration, Commissioner · filed 2025-03-31(a)(2)

In assessing a claimant’s residual functional capacity, an ALJ must consider all medically determinable impairments, even those found to be non-severe. Id. §§ 404.1545(a)(2), 416.945(a)(2).

Section 404.1545(a)(2) requires an RFC assessment to consider severe and nonsevere impairments; a step two severity error does not warrant remand when the ALJ considers all impairments at later steps.

Ryan v. Social Security Administration · filed 2025-04-16(a)(2)

If a claimant has any severe impairment, the ALJ continues with the sequential evaluation and, between steps three and four, assesses a claimant’s workplace limitations considering all impairments, severe and non-severe. 20 C.F.R. § 404.1545(a)(2). So long as the ALJ finds some severe impairment at step two and then continues to consider all impairments at subsequent steps, earlier errors at step two are immaterial and do not justify remand.

Section 404.1545(a)(2) requires an ALJ to consider the limiting effects of nonsevere impairments when assessing residual functional capacity.

Lail v. Commissioner Social Security Administration · filed 2025-04-30(a)(2)

Even if an impairment is not severe, the ALJ must still consider its limiting effect when formulating the claimant’s RFC.

An ALJ must consider nonsevere impairments when assessing residual functional capacity, but need not expressly discuss each one when the decision makes clear that the ALJ applied SSR 96-8p.

Boyatt v. SSA · filed 2025-05-01(a)(2), (e)

It is true that in determining a claimant’s RFC, the ALJ should consider the effects of all impairments, including those found “not severe.” ... However, the Sixth Circuit has held that “an ALJ need not specifically discuss all nonsevere impairments in the residual-functional-capacity assessment when the ALJ makes clear that her decision is controlled by SSR 96-8p.” ... The ALJ in this case specifically noted, like in Emard, that in making his RFC finding he “must consider all of the claimant’s impairments, including impairments that are not severe (20 CFR 404.1520(e), 404.1545, 416.920(e), and 416.945; SSR 96-8p).”

Section 404.1545(a)(2) requires consideration of nonsevere impairments when assessing residual functional capacity, but a mild impairment need not produce an express work restriction when the assessment accounts for it.

JEAVONS v. O'MALLEY · filed 2025-05-19(a)(2)

Remand is not required for further consideration at step four or five because, following Hess, the ALJ was not required to specifically include limitations associated with Jennifer J.’s mild impairment in adapting or managing herself when reaching his RFC determination.

An ALJ assessing residual functional capacity must consider all medically determinable impairments, including those found non-severe at step two.

Swartz v. O'Malley · filed 2025-05-06(a)(2)

In making this assessment, the ALJ must consider all the claimant’s medically determinable impairments, including any non-severe impairments identified by the ALJ at step two of his or her analysis.

Section 404.1545(a)(2) requires an ALJ to consider all medically determinable impairments, including non-severe impairments, when assessing residual functional capacity.

Ortiz v. O'Malley · filed 2025-05-14(a)(2)

Moreover, an ALJ is required to again consider an MDI at step four of the sequential analysis regardless of whether the MDI is deemed “severe.”

Section 404.1545(a)(1)-(2) requires the ALJ to consider severe and non-severe impairments when assessing residual functional capacity, though an impairment that causes no meaningful functional limitation need not be included as an RFC limitation.

Wilbert v. Bisignano · filed 2025-05-20(a)(1)-(2)

While an ALJ is not required to include non-severe conditions that do not meaningfully result in functional limitations in the RFC, ... an ALJ is required to consider all of Plaintiff’s severe and non-severe impairments.

Section 404.1545(a)(2) requires the RFC assessment to consider all known medically determinable impairments, including nonsevere ones; an ALJ may account for mild mental limitations by discussing them at Step 2 and referencing them in the RFC finding.

Jensen v. Social Security Administration, Commissioner · filed 2025-05-30(a)(2)

But the ALJ did consider Jensen’s mild mental limitations at length in Step 2, Tr. 1900-02, and referenced them in the RFC finding.

Section 404.1545(a)(2) requires an ALJ to consider medically determinable impairments, including nonsevere impairments, when assessing residual functional capacity.

Hernandez v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2025-06-23(a)(2)

Indeed, an ALJ must “consider all of [a plaintiff's] medically determinable impairments of which [he or she is] aware, including [the] medically determinable impairments that are not ‘severe[.]’” Id. (quoting 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1545(a)(2), 416.945(a)(2)). ... To the contrary, the ALJ’s analysis reflects that he did consider the impairment in crafting his RFC.

Section 404.1545(a)(2) requires an ALJ to consider severe and non-severe impairments when determining residual functional capacity.

BANKS v. DUDEK · filed 2025-06-02(a)(2)

As a threshold matter, it is undisputed that the ALJ must consider non-severe, as well as severe, impairments, in making the RFC determination. See 20 C.F.R. 404.1545(a)(2).

Section 404.1545(a)(2) requires the ALJ to consider non-severe impairments when assessing residual functional capacity, but does not require a work restriction for every such impairment.

Scott v. Bisignano · filed 2025-06-06(a)(2)

The ALJ is obligated to consider “all of [the claimant’s] determinable impairments of which [the ALJ] is aware, including [claimant's] medically determinable impairments that are not ‘severe,’ when [the ALJ] assess[ses] [claimant’s] residual functional capacity.” 20 C.F.R. § 404.1545(a)(2). Here, the ALJ did just that. The regulations do not require that the ALJ then find that a non-severe impairment would impose a work restriction.

Section 404.1545(e) requires an ALJ to consider the limiting effects of all impairments, including non-severe ones, when determining residual functional capacity. An assumed failure to discuss them separately does not warrant remand when no evidence supports additional functional limits.

C. v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2025-06-09(e)

The ALJ is required to “consider the limiting effects of all [of claimant’s] impairment(s), even those that are not severe, in determining [the RFC].” 20 C.F.R. § 404.1545(e). ... Where a challenge to an RFC assessment would not trigger remand and a plaintiff identifies no evidence that a more restrictive RFC was actually required, she may not nevertheless obtain remand just by repackaging her objection as an articulation error.

Section 404.1545(a)(2) requires the ALJ to consider limitations from all medically determinable impairments, including non-severe mental impairments, when assessing residual functional capacity.

SLAUGHTER v. O'MALLEY · filed 2025-06-10(a)(2)

Though the ALJ was permitted to find that Plaintiff only had mild limitation in the four functional areas, his subsequent RFC assessment failed to consider whether Plaintiff’s mild limitations required a corresponding RFC limitation. As such, this matter is remanded for consideration of all of Plaintiff’s medically determinable impairments in the formulation of the RFC.

Section 404.1545(a)(2) requires the ALJ to consider all medically determinable impairments, including those that are not severe, when assessing residual functional capacity.

Alvidres v. O'Malley · filed 2025-06-13(a)(2)

The ALJ will consider “all medically determinable impairments of which we are aware, including . . . medically determinable impairments that are not ‘severe’.” 20 C.F.R. § 404.1545(a)(2).

Section 404.1545(a)(2) requires an ALJ to consider mild mental limitations when formulating residual functional capacity, though it does not require a corresponding restriction.

Worden v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2025-06-20(a)(2)

This Court and others have held that an ALJ is not required to impose any restriction in the RFC based on a “mild” mental limitation but does need to at least consider the issue.

Section 404.1545(a)(2) requires the ALJ to consider all medically determinable impairments, including nonsevere mental impairments, when assessing residual functional capacity.

Draeger v. O'Malley · filed 2025-06-27(a)(2)

While the ALJ was not required to explicitly incorporate limitations into the RFC, he was required to explain why the mild or minimal limitations from step two were excluded from the RFC. See 20 C.F.R. § 404.1545(a)(2) (The ALJ must consider “all of [a claimant's] medically determinable impairments of which we are aware, including your medically determinable impairments that are not “severe[.]”); see also SSR 96-8p (explaining why even non-severe limitations can “be critical to the outcome of the claim”).

Section 404.1545(a)(2) requires the ALJ to consider limitations from nonsevere impairments when assessing residual functional capacity.

BRODMAN v. O'MALLEY · filed 2025-07-17(a)(2)

In assessing a claimant’s RFC, the ALJ “must consider limitations and restrictions imposed by all of an individual’s impairments, even those that are not ‘severe.’” S.S.R. 96-8p, 1996 WL 374184 (S.S.A.), at *5 (July 2, 1996). See also 20 C.F.R. § 404.1545(a)(2). ... Accordingly, merely because the ALJ did not find Plaintiff's mental impairments to be severe does not mean that these impairments could not still have affected her RFC.

Section 404.1545(a)(2) requires an ALJ to consider non-severe impairments when assessing residual functional capacity, but does not require a work restriction for every such impairment.

Turner v. Bisignano · filed 2025-07-03(a)(2)

The ALJ is obligated to consider “all of [the claimant’s] determinable impairments of which [the ALJ] is aware, including [claimant’s] medically determinable impairments that are not ‘severe,’ when [the ALJ] assess[ses] [claimant’s] residual functional capacity.” 20 C.F.R. § 404.1545(a)(2). Here, the ALJ did just that. The regulations do not require that the ALJ then find that a non-severe impairment would impose a work restriction.

Section 404.1545(a)(2) requires an ALJ to consider all medically determinable impairments when assessing residual functional capacity, including impairments found not severe.

Rivera v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2025-07-17(a)(2)

The Court agrees with the plaintiff and finds that the ALJ erred by failing to adequately address or account for any functional limitations associated with the plaintiff’s depressive disorder in the RFC.

Section 404.1545(a)(2) requires the ALJ to consider all medically determinable impairments, including non-severe impairments, when assessing residual functional capacity.

Alexandre v. O'Malley · filed 2025-07-21(a)(2)

In making this assessment, the ALJ must consider all the claimant’s medically determinable impairments, ... including any non-severe impairments identified by the ALJ at step two of his or her analysis.

Section 404.1545(e) requires the ALJ to consider severe and non-severe impairments together when assessing residual functional capacity.

Watson v. Social Security Administration · filed 2025-07-22(e)

Once the ALJ proceeds past step two, the labeling of an impairment as severe or non- severe has no legal significance; the medical record as whole is the basis for the determinations at steps three and four.

Section 404.1545(a) requires an ALJ to consider all medically determinable impairments, including non-severe impairments, when assessing residual functional capacity.

Aarseth v. Bisignano · filed 2025-07-22(a)

When determining a claimant’s RFC, an ALJ must consider all of a claimant’s “medically determinable impairments,” including medically determinable impairments that are not “severe.” 20 C.F.R. § 404.1545(a).

Section 404.1545(c) requires an ALJ to consider and explain the consideration of severe and non-severe mental impairments when assessing residual functional capacity.

Hansard v. King · filed 2025-07-23(c)

In assessing Plaintiff's RFC, the ALJ was required to consider—and explain its consideration of—both severe and non-severe impairments.

Section 404.1545(e) requires the ALJ to consider the limiting effects of all medically determinable impairments, including those that are not severe, when assessing residual functional capacity.

Trausch v. Bisignano · filed 2025-07-15(e)

Based on this evidence supporting Plaintiff’s knee pain, and other evidence, the ALJ found that Plaintiff’s impairments, including her osteoarthritis, caused some limitation in her ability to perform basic work activities, and the ALJ accounted for this by limiting Plaintiff to a less than full range of light exertional work with additional exertional limitations, including postural limitations to account for all of Plaintiff’s impairments.

Section 404.1545(a)(1) requires an ALJ assessing residual functional capacity to consider whether mild mental limitations found at step two should be reflected in that assessment.

Vega v. Colvin · filed 2025-08-04(a)(1)

Thus, the Court concludes that the ALJ should have considered whether Plaintiff’s mild mental limitations assessed at step two should be reflected in Plaintiff’s RFC.

Section 404.1545(a)(2) requires an ALJ to consider non-severe impairments when assessing residual functional capacity; consideration of those impairments can be sufficient without a separate discussion of them at step four.

Roach v. Commissioner of the Social Security Administration · filed 2025-08-08(a)(2)

The RFC analysis “must account for all of the claimant’s impairments, including those that are not severe or fail to meet a listed impairment.” Id. (citing 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1520(e), 416.920(e), 404.1545(a)(2), 416.945(a)(2); SSR 96-8P, 61 Fed. Reg. 34,474, 34,475 (July 2, 1996)). ... For the reasons outlined above, the Court determines that Magistrate Judge properly found there was substantial evidence to support that Plaintiff’s mental impairments were non-severe and that the ALJ’s consideration of this non-severe impairment was sufficient.

An RFC assessment must consider all medically determinable impairments, including impairments found non-severe at step two.

Bynaker v. Colvin · filed 2025-08-13(a)(2)

In making this assessment, the ALJ must consider all the claimant’s medically determinable impairments, including any non-severe impairments identified by the ALJ at step two of his or her analysis.

Section 404.1545 requires the Commissioner to consider limitations from all medically determinable impairments when assessing residual functional capacity, including impairments that are not severe.

Forsch v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2025-08-11(a)(2), (e)

When determining the RFC, the ALJ must “consider limitations and restrictions imposed by all of an individual's impairments, even those that are not ‘severe.’” Social Security Ruling (“SSR”) 96-8p, 1996 WL 374184 at *5 (SSA July 2, 1996). See also 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1545(a)(2), (e) (noting that the Commissioner will consider all of a claimant's medically determinable impairments, even if they are not severe); Emard v. Comm’r of Soc. Sec., 953 F.3d 844, 851 (6th Cir. 2020).

Section 404.1545(a)(2) requires consideration of all medically determinable impairments, including nonsevere impairments, when assessing residual functional capacity.

Cole v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2025-08-19(a)(2)

Second, the ALJ expressly noted that he considered plaintiff’s anxiety and depression in reaching her RFC. Dkt. #4, p. 26. This is consistent with applicable regulations. See 20 C.F.R. § 404.1545(a)(2) (“We will consider all of your medically determinable impairments of which we are aware, including your medically determinable impairments that are not ‘severe’. . .when we assess your residual functional capacity.”).

Section 404.1545(a)(2) requires the ALJ to consider all medically determinable impairments, including nonsevere mental impairments, when assessing residual functional capacity.

LODISE v. O'MALLEY · filed 2025-08-29(a)(2)

The ALJ failed to comply with his duty to consider nonsevere impairments throughout the SEP; this constituted legal error.

Section 404.1545(a)(2) requires an ALJ to consider medically determinable impairments, including non-severe mental impairments, when assessing residual functional capacity.

Singh v. Commisioner of the Social Security Administration · filed 2025-08-22(a)(2)

Finding the evidence regarding Plaintiff’s mental impairments “less persuasive” does not permit the ALJ to disregard it entirely in the RFC analysis—instead, the ALJ is required to evaluate the totality of the evidence in determining Plaintiff’s RFC.

Section 404.1545(a)(2) requires an ALJ to consider non-severe impairments when assessing residual functional capacity; a supported credibility assessment and step-two discussion can adequately address a non-severe mental impairment.

Williams v. Bisignano · filed 2025-08-27(a)(2)

Therefore, the ALJ’s credibility assessment in his RFC analysis and his step-two discussion together were adequate to fulfill his obligation to provide a more detailed assessment of Williams’s non-severe depression in his RFC analysis.

Section 404.1545 requires consideration of all medically determinable impairments, including nonsevere impairments, when assessing residual functional capacity.

Flocchini v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2025-09-12(a)(2)

The Court agrees with the Commissioner. Here, the ALJ proceeded past step 2 to the further steps of the analysis and “considered all of the claimant’s medically determinable impairments, including those that are not severe, when assessing the claimant’s residual functional capacity.” (A.R. 20). See also 20 C.F.R. § 404.1545 (“If you have more than one impairment. We will consider all of your medically determinable impairments of which we are aware, including your medically determinable impairments that are not “severe,” as explained in §§ 404.1520(c), 404.1521, and 404.1523, when we assess your residual functional capacity.”).

Section 404.1545(a)(2) requires an ALJ to consider the limiting effects of severe and nonsevere impairments when assessing residual functional capacity.

Saxey v. Bisignano · filed 2025-09-15(a)(2)

And after step two, the ALJ must consider the limiting effects of both severe and nonsevere impairments.

Section 404.1545(a)(2) requires an ALJ to consider the effects of all medically determinable impairments, including non-severe impairments, when assessing residual functional capacity.

Brown v. Bisignano · filed 2025-09-02(a)(2)

Rather, an ALJ must consider the effects of all the claimant’s medically determinable impairments—including those found severe and those found non-severe—when assessing the RFC.

Section 404.1545(a)(2) requires an ALJ to consider limitations from non-severe impairments when assessing residual functional capacity.

Tavera v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2025-09-02(a)(2)

Because the ALJ failed to consider limitations from non-severe impairments, as identified at step two, the ALJ did not properly formulate Plaintiff’s RFC.

An ALJ must account for limitations from both severe and non-severe impairments when assessing residual functional capacity.

Estrella · filed 2025-09-02(a)(2)

An ALJ is required to “account for limitations imposed by both severe and non[-]severe impairments.”