20 C.F.R. § 404.1545

Section 404.1545 permits an ALJ to assess residual functional capacity from all relevant evidence without a specific medical opinion supporting the finding.

Tallman v. Saul · filed 2021-09-07

Thus, “there is no requirement that an RFC finding be supported by a specific medical opinion.” Hensley v. Colvin, 829 F.3d 926, 932 (8th Cir. 2016). ... Based upon the entire record, the Court holds that the ALJ properly determined Tallman’s residual cancer effects limited her to light work with occasional postural activities and environmental limitations.

Section 404.1545 requires an ALJ to assess residual functional capacity using the entire case record, including objective medical findings and the claimant's subjective complaints.

MILES v. KIJAKAZI · filed 2021-09-08

"The regulations require that an ALJ's RFC be based on the entire case record, including the objective medical findings and the credibility of the claimant's subjective complaints." ... Cathy M. has not developed how the objective testing results conflicted with her RFC.

Section 404.1545(a) requires residual functional capacity to reflect what a claimant can do despite impairments, based on all relevant evidence.

Ellis v. Saul · filed 2021-09-09(a)

The RFC is a measure of what an individual can do despite the limitations imposed by his impairments. 20 C.F.R. § 404.1545(a). ... The ALJ adequately considered the totality of the medical evidence in formulating the RFC, including Claimant’s obesity, and supported her decision with substantial evidence.

Section 404.1545 measures a claimant’s capacity to perform physical and mental work activities on a regular and sustained basis.

Lewis v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2021-09-10

“Residual functional capacity” is a measure of a claimant’s capacity to do physical and mental work activities on a regular and sustained basis.

Section 404.1545 defines residual functional capacity as the most a claimant can still do despite limitations; the assessment must have sufficient support in the administrative record.

Everhart v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2021-09-13(a)(1)

The RFC assessment “is the most [a claimant] can still do despite [his or her] limitations.” 20 C.F.R. § 404.1545(a)(1). ... There was sufficient evidence in the administrative transcript upon which to base the RFC determination.

An RFC determination can be supported by substantial evidence even when it mirrors a nonexamining source’s opinion, if other evidence and treatment records support it.

Rice v. Kijakazi · filed 2021-09-13(a)

Overall, even if the ALJ’s RFC mirrors the RFC in the opinion of a non-examining source, the other evidence and treatment records still provide substantial evidence to support the ALJ’s decision.

Section 404.1545(a)(3) makes the claimant responsible for providing evidence about residual functional capacity and the Commissioner responsible for developing a complete medical history.

Stevens v. Kijakazi · filed 2021-09-14(a)(3)

Ultimately, the claimant is responsible for providing evidence relating to his RFC and the Commissioner is responsible for developing the claimant’s “complete medical history, including arranging for a consultative examination(s) if necessary, and making every reasonable effort to help [the claimant] get medical reports from [the claimant’s] own medical sources.” 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1545(a)(3), 416.945(a)(3).

An ALJ must base a claimant’s residual functional capacity assessment on all relevant evidence, including medical records, medical opinions, and the claimant’s symptoms.

FREEMAN v. SAUL · filed 2021-09-15(a)

When formulating a claimant’s RFC, an ALJ must base his or her assessment upon all relevant evidence, including medical records, medical source opinions, and a description of the claimant’s own symptoms. 20 C.F.R. § 404.1545(a).

Section 404.1545(a)(3) requires an ALJ to assess residual functional capacity using all relevant medical and other evidence in the record.

Adkinson v. Kijakazi · filed 2021-09-16(a)(3)

The ALJ’s assessment must be based on all the relevant medical and other evidence in the record. ... Here, the ALJ reasonably considered the entire record, including the medical opinions, treatment notes, and Plaintiff’s subjective complaints.

An RFC assessment under § 404.1545 must address evidence inconsistent with the work limitations the ALJ assigns.

Bell v. Saul · filed 2021-09-17

The ALJ erred in concluding that Plaintiff would be off-task for only five percent of the time without addressing record evidence inconsistent with that determination and while interpreting a doctor’s statement that she was asymptomatic to mean that she no longer had headaches.

Section 404.1545 requires the ALJ to assess residual functional capacity using all relevant evidence, including medical records, medical opinions, and the claimant’s descriptions of limitations.

Rodriguez v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2021-09-17(a)(1)

The ALJ is responsible for determining a claimant’s RFC based on all the relevant evidence, including a claimant’s medical record, the medical opinions, and a claimant’s descriptions of his limitations. 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1545, 404.1546. ... The ALJ reasonably considered the medical evidence in the record in determining that Plaintiff could perform a reduced range of light work.

Section 404.1545 permits an ALJ to assess residual functional capacity using evidence beyond medical opinions, including treatment progress and hearing testimony.

Root v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2021-09-17(a)

As the Magistrate Judge explained, the ALJ did not base his RFC assessment solely on the opinions of Dr. Jackson and Dr. Clanton, but considered other factors such as Plaintiff’s improvements following voluntary inpatient treatment and his testimony and presentation at the hearing. Thus, the Court finds no error in the ALJ’s RFC assessment.

An RFC assessment can be supported even when a nonexamining physician did not review later evidence, if the ALJ considered that evidence in formulating the RFC.

Gothard v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2021-09-22

But, the ALJ’s Decision makes clear that the ALJ considered and took into account evidence post-dating Dr. Rosen’s opinion in formulating the RFC.

Section 404.1545 requires the ALJ to assess residual functional capacity based on all relevant evidence, including medical findings that may show additional limitations.

Zima v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2021-09-16

The ALJ’s error in this respect requires remand because the ALJ must determine an individual’s RFC, meaning “what an individual can still do despite his or her limitations,” based upon all of the relevant evidence in the record, even the findings of Dr. Gupta in his 2019 examination.

Section 404.1545 defines residual functional capacity as what a claimant can do in a work setting despite limitations imposed by medically determinable impairments.

Quale v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2021-09-16

RFC is a medical assessment of what an individual can do in a work setting in spite of functional limitations and environmental restrictions imposed by all of her medically determinable impairments. 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1545 and 416.945.

Residual functional capacity is the most a claimant can still do despite limitations and is determined from all relevant evidence in the record.

Fernandez v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2021-09-16(a)

The RFC determination is “the most [a claimant] can still do despite [her] limitations,” and is based upon all the relevant evidence in the case record. 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1545(a), 416.945(a); SSR 96-8p, 1996 WL 374184 (Jul. 2, 1996). ... The Court concludes that the ALJ’s finding that Plaintiff has the RFC to perform light work is supported by substantial evidence.

Section 404.1545(a)(3) requires the ALJ to consider all relevant medical and other evidence when assessing residual functional capacity.

Norwood v. Kijakazi · filed 2021-09-17(a)(3)

In assessing RFC, the ALJ considers “all of the relevant medical and other evidence.” 20 C.F.R. § 404.1545(a)(3). ... Here, in assessing Plaintiff’s RFC, the ALJ considered and discussed Plaintiff’s subjective symptom testimony and statements to others about his activities and limitations, the objective medical evidence, and the opinion evidence (Tr. 22-26). The ALJ’s narrative discussion is sufficient for the court to follow the ALJ’s reasoning and is supported by substantial evidence of record.

When the record contains only diagnostic findings and no useful assessment of work-related limitations, the ALJ must develop the record before determining residual functional capacity.

Farns v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2021-09-20

Where the record lacks a “useful assessment” of the claimant’s limitations, remand is appropriate. ... Review of the record leads me to conclude that remand is appropriate to allow the ALJ to do so here.

An RFC assessment must rest on evidence, and the ALJ must explain why a medical opinion supporting a claimant’s need to elevate his legs receives less weight.

McClure v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2021-09-21(a)(3)

It is based on medical evidence and testimony by the claimant or others. Id. at 676 (citing 20 C.F.R. § 404.1545(a)(3)). ... Like the magistrate judge, the court finds no such supporting evidence cited by the ALJ to suggest why Dr. Smiley’s testimony regarding leg elevation was given less weight than other portions.

Section 404.1545(a)(1) requires an RFC assessment based on all relevant evidence, including testimony from the claimant and family members.

MARTIN v. KIJAKAZI · filed 2021-09-21(a)(1)

The RFC is based upon medical evidence as well as other evidence, such as testimony by the claimant or his friends and family. Craft, 539 F.3d at 676; see also 20 C.F.R. § 404.1545(a)(1) (“We will assess your residual functional capacity based on all relevant evidence in your case record.”); SSR 96-8P at *7 (“The RFC assessment must include a discussion of why reported symptom-related functional limitations and restrictions can or cannot reasonably be accepted as consistent with the medical and other evidence.”).

Section 404.1545(a) addresses residual functional capacity as what a claimant can still do despite physical and mental limitations.

Wilson v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2021-09-21(a)

While Plaintiff may contend that the vocational expert’s testimony classifying a hypothetical person with the limitations imposed as “sedentary” (Tr. 79), the RFC assessment is the ALJ’s ultimate finding of what the claimant can still do despite his physical and mental limitations.

Section 404.1545 permits an ALJ to assess residual functional capacity from the record without a specific medical opinion supporting the finding.

Coleman v. Kijakazi · filed 2021-09-21(a)(3)

Even though the ALJ relied on Dr. Moore’s opinion (and, notably, plaintiff’s own doctors did not provide their own relevant RFC source statements), “there is no requirement that an RFC finding be supported by a specific medical opinion.” ... Here, the ALJ acted within her discretion to resolve conflicts in the record, she gave good reasons for the functional limitations she found, and the record does not warrant assignment of any greater limitations [Tr. 15-20].

An RFC finding that contradicts all medical opinions cannot rest solely on the absence of non-medical opinion evidence.

Torres v. Social Security Administration · filed 2021-09-22(a)(3)

The absence of non-medical opinion evidence is not substantial evidence that can support an RFC determination that contradicts all medical opinion in the record.

Section 404.1545 requires an ALJ to consider a claimant’s subjective symptoms along with objective evidence when assessing residual functional capacity.

McClanahan v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2021-09-22

In determining a claimant’s RFC, the ALJ must consider, in addition to the objective evidence, the claimant’s “subjective symptoms,” including “pain and descriptions of other limitations.” Lisa R. v. Comm’r of Soc. Sec., No. 18-cv-763, 2020 WL 210273, at *4, 2020 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 5796, at *11 (N.D.N.Y. Jan. 14, 2020) (citing 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1545, 416.945).

Section 404.1545 makes a claimant responsible for providing relevant evidence for an RFC assessment but does not require the claimant to develop the evidence for a favorable finding.

Ramirez v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2021-09-22

Ramírez has the burden of proof at Step Four, but she is not required to take a role in developing the evidence for an RFC finding in her favor, although she is responsible for providing relevant evidence. 20 C.F.R. § 404.1545.

When assessing residual functional capacity, an ALJ must consider all relevant evidence and evaluate the record fairly.

Frey v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2021-09-20(a)(1), (a)(3)

Rather, she must consider all relevant evidence in the case record and evaluate the record fairly. Golembiewski v. Barnhart, 322 F.3d 912, 917 (7th Cir. 2003); 20 C.F.R. § 404.1545 (a)(1) and (3). In this case, the ALJ did just that—she carefully reviewed and considered the medical evidence from Plaintiff’s treating and examining sources as to all of Plaintiff’s claimed impairments.

An RFC assessment must consider all relevant evidence, including evidence for and against a claimant’s need for an assistive device.

Wojcik v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2021-09-23(a)(3)

Moreover, the ALJ examined all of the evidence as required by 20 C.F.R. 404. 1545, and clearly cited to both (1) those instances in the record which he believed to support a finding that Plaintiff needs an assistive device, and (2) those instances in the record that he believed supported a finding that Plaintiff does not need an assistive device.

An RFC assessment must consider all relevant medical and other evidence when accounting for a claimant’s supported mental limitations.

Vanlieshout v. Kijakazi · filed 2021-09-24(a)(3)

The assessment of a claimant’s RFC is based on “all the relevant medical and other evidence.” 20 C.F.R. § 404.1545(a)(3). ... The ALJ’s RFC assessment and the hypothetical question posed to the VE adequately accounted for the restrictions Drs. Kocina and Fiore found would accommodate Plaintiff’s limitations in CPP.

An RFC assessment must consider all relevant evidence in the record, including opinions from treating physicians and other acceptable medical sources.

Anderson v. Saul · filed 2021-09-27(a)(3)

An individual’s residual functional capacity should be based on all of the relevant evidence in the case record, including opinions submitted by treating physicians or other acceptable medical sources.

Section 404.1545(a) requires the Commissioner to assess residual functional capacity using all relevant evidence, including medical records and the claimant’s description of his limitations.

Goodman v. Kijakazi · filed 2021-09-29(a)

The RFC is defined as the most a claimant can do despite his limitations, including both physical and mental limitations. 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1545(a), 416.945(a). “The Commissioner must determine a claimant’s RFC based on all of the relevant evidence, including the medical records, observations of treating physicians and others, and an individual’s own description of [his] limitations.” Hensley v. Colvin, 829 F.3d 926, 931–32 (8th Cir. 2016) (quoting Myers v. Colvin, 721 F.3d 521, 527 (8th Cir. 2013)). Here, the ALJ properly considered all the relevant evidence in reaching his RFC determination.

Section 404.1545(a) requires an RFC assessment to consider all relevant evidence, including medical records, medical source opinions, and the claimant’s account of his limitations.

OOSTERKAMP v. COMMISSIONER OF SOCIAL SECURITY · filed 2021-09-29(a)

The assessment must be based upon all of the relevant evidence, including the medical records, medical source opinions, and the individual’s subjective allegations and description of his own limitations. ... After a careful review of the record as a whole, however, there is insufficient detail in his decision to allow me to discern the basis for the ALJ’s RFC determination.

Section 404.1545 requires the ALJ to assess physical residual functional capacity using medical and other evidence in the record.

Cardoza v. Kijakazi · filed 2021-09-23(a)(3)

To the contrary, it was the ALJ’s duty to develop Cardoza’s physical RFC based on the medical evidence and other evidence in the record. 20 C.F.R. § 404.1545(3), 20 C.F.R. § 404.1546(c).

Section 404.1545(a)(1) defines residual functional capacity as the most a claimant can still do despite his limitations.

Mutschler v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2021-09-23(a)(1)

An RFC is an assessment of the most a claimant can still do despite his limitations. 20 C.F.R. § 404.1545(a)(1).

Section 404.1545(a)(3) requires consideration of all relevant medical and nonmedical evidence when assessing residual functional capacity.

Bellido-Benejan v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2021-09-24(a)(3)

To make this determination, the ALJ uses all relevant medical and non- medical evidence in the record.

Section 404.1545(a)(1) defines residual functional capacity as the most a claimant can still do despite limitations, based on all relevant evidence.

(SS) Harrell v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2021-09-27(a)(1)

The RFC is “the most [one] can still do despite [his or her] limitations” and represents an assessment “based on all the relevant evidence.” 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1545(a)(1), 416.945(a)(1).

Section 404.1545(a)(1) requires the ALJ to consider properly submitted evidence relevant to a claimant’s limitations.

Roth v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2021-09-27(a)(1)

If the claimant properly submits post-hearing evidence and the evidence is relevant to his limitations, the ALJ must consider it.

Section 404.1545(a) measures what a claimant can do despite limitations; medical records showing retained strength and dexterity can support an RFC finding.

Greer v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2021-09-27(a)

The RFC is a measure of what an individual can do despite her limitations. Young v. Barnhart, 362 F.3d 995, 1000–01 (7th Cir. 2004); 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1545(a), 416.945(a). ... In fact, the ALJ went through a significant portion of the medical records, summarizing them in his report, to find that overall, they indicate that Plaintiff has not lost as much strength and dexterity as Plaintiff described during his testimony.

Section 404.1545(a) describes residual functional capacity as a person’s work-related abilities despite limitations, assessed from the record as a whole.

Anteer v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2021-09-27(a)

The RFC is an indication of an individual’s work-related abilities despite their limitations. See 20 C.F.R. § 404.1545(a). ... The court concludes that the ALJ considered the evidence Plaintiff cites regarding her leg pain and based the RFC upon the whole record.

Section 404.1545(a)(1) defines residual functional capacity as the most a claimant can do despite the combined effect of all limitations.

Tucker v. Social Security Administration, Commissioner of (TV1) · filed 2021-09-27(a)(1)

The ALJ properly based Plaintiff's residual functional capacity upon the entire record. Residual functional capacity is the most a claimant can do despite the combined effect of all limitations.

Section 404.1545 defines residual functional capacity as what a person can do at work despite limitations from medically determinable impairments; the assessment must account for medication side effects that affect that capacity.

Royalty v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2021-09-28

RFC is a medical assessment of what an individual can do in a work setting in spite of functional limitations and environmental restrictions imposed by all of his medically determinable impairments. 20 C.F.R. § 404.1545. ... Accordingly, on remand, the ALJ should also evaluate the extent to which plaintiff’s medication side effects impact his RFC.

Section 404.1545(a)(3) requires an ALJ to consider medical opinions and all other record evidence when assessing residual functional capacity.

Spellmeyer v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2021-09-29(a)(3)

An Administrative Law Judge makes this finding based on a consideration of medical opinions and all other evidence in the case record. 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1529, 404.1545(a)(3), 404.1546(c).

Residual functional capacity must be based on all relevant medical and other evidence.

McGrew v. Kijakazi · filed 2021-09-29(a)(3)

And, as previously stated, it is ultimately “based on all of the relevant medical and other evidence.” 20 C.F.R. § 404.1545(a)(3); see, e.g., Myers, 721 F.3d at 527; Perks, 687 F.3d at 1092.

Section 404.1545(a) requires the ALJ to assess residual functional capacity using all relevant, credible evidence, including medical records, treating physicians’ observations, and the claimant’s account of limitations.

Berry v. Kijakazi · filed 2021-09-29(a)

The ALJ bears the primary responsibility for assessing a claimant’s RFC based on all relevant, credible evidence in the record, including medical records, the observations of treating physicians and others, and the claimant’s own description of his symptoms and limitations. Goff v. Barnhart, 421 F.3d 785, 793 (8th Cir. 2005); 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1545(a), 416.945(a).

Section 404.1545(a)(1) measures residual functional capacity by the most a claimant can still do despite limitations.

Gibbas v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2021-09-29(a)(1)

The residual functional capacity assessment is an evaluation of the most a claimant can still do despite his limitations. 20 C.F.R. § 404.1545(a)(1). ... Plaintiff’s contentions as to the residual functional capacity assessment fall short. A careful review of the record reflects that the residual functional capacity assessment is supported by substantial evidence.

Section 404.1545(a) defines residual functional capacity as the most a claimant can still do despite their limitations.

Abraham v. Commissioner of Social Security Administration · filed 2021-09-29(a)

Residual functional capacity is “the most [a claimant] can still do despite [his] limitations.” 20 C.F.R. § 404.1545(a).

Section 404.1545 requires an ALJ to consider all relevant evidence when assessing residual functional capacity.

Meyer v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2021-09-24(a)(1), (a)(3)

The ALJ must consider all relevant evidence. ... The Court finds that the ALJ considered the record as a whole and properly weighed each medical opinion in accordance with the regulations.

Section 404.1545(a)(1) calls for an RFC assessment based on all relevant evidence, including medical findings, treatment, and the claimant’s descriptions of limitations.

Rogers v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2021-09-24(a)(1)

As such, ALJ McGuan appropriately assessed an RFC based on all relevant evidence, including objective medical evidence, medical history, clinical findings, prescribed treatment and claimant’s own descriptions of limitations.

Section 404.1545(a)(3) requires RFC to be assessed from all relevant evidence; an ALJ need not rely on a single medical opinion.

(SS) Schillaci v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2021-09-29(a)(3)

The Court agrees with Defendant that Plaintiff has not provided any legal authority requiring an ALJ to rely on a single medical source opinion to determine the RFC, and that the ALJ was not required to adopt the findings or opinion of any of the physicians but rather was required to determine the RFC based on all of the evidence in the record.

An ALJ considers medical evidence and opinions when assessing residual functional capacity.

Fernandez v. Kijakazi · filed 2021-09-30(a)(3)

Among the evidence an ALJ relies on in an RFC assessment is medical evidence and opinions. ... The ALJ considered all of the medical evidence and opinions, and based his assessment on the five factors listed in the revised regulations.

Section 404.1545 requires an RFC determination to consider all relevant evidence, including medical-source diagnoses, treatment, observations, and opinions.

Fischer v. Kijakazi · filed 2021-09-30

However, an RFC determination must be based on all of the relevant evidence, including the diagnoses, treatment, observations, and opinions of medical sources, such as treating and examining physicians. 20 C.F.R. § 404.1545.

Section 404.1545(a)(3) calls for an RFC assessment based on medical source statements and all other evidence in the record.

Faught v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2021-09-30(a)(3)

The Administrative Law Judge makes this finding based on a consideration of medical source statements and all other evidence in the case record. Id. §§ 404.1529, 404.1545(a)(3), 404.1546(c), 416.929, 416,945(a)(3), 416.946(c). ... For the reasons set forth above, the ALJ’s RFC determination is supported by substantial evidence in the record and comports with applicable law.

An ALJ assessing residual functional capacity must consider the entire record, including opinion evidence, nonsevere impairments, and identified limitations.

Miranda v. Saul · filed 2021-10-08(a)

In determining RFC specifically, an ALJ must consider the entire record, including opinion evidence, impairments that are not severe, and any limitations the ALJ finds.

Section 404.1545(a)(3) requires an RFC assessment to consider medical evidence and other evidence, including testimony from the claimant and people who know her.

Van Jacob v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2021-09-30(a)(3)

A claimant’s RFC must be based on the medical evidence in the record and other evidence, such as testimony by the claimant or her friends and family. 20 C.F.R. § 404.1545(a)(3). ... Reviewing the record as a whole, the Court finds that the ALJ met her burden to explain which opinions she accepted and which she discounted and why.

Section 404.1545(a)(3) requires the ALJ to consider medical source statements and other record evidence when assessing residual functional capacity.

McDonald v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2021-09-30(a)(3)

The ALJ makes this finding based on a consideration of medical source statements and all other evidence in the case record. 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1529, 404.1545(a)(3), 404.1546(c). ... After reviewing the evidence in the record and the decision, the Court finds that the ALJ’s RFC determination was supported by substantial evidence.

Residual functional capacity is the most a claimant can still do despite his limitations.

Price v. Kijakazi · filed 2021-09-30(a)(1)

A claimant’s “residual functional capacity is the most [he] can still do despite [his] limitations.” 20 C.F.R. § 404.1545(a)(1); see McCoy, 648 F.3d at 614 (“A claimant’s [residual functional capacity] represents the most he can do despite the combined effects of all of his credible limitations and must be based on all credible evidence.”).

An ALJ determines residual functional capacity from all relevant evidence; the finding need not be supported by a specific medical opinion.

Moser v. Kijakazi · filed 2021-09-30(a)

First, to the extent Moser suggests that her RFC should have been determined or confirmed by a medical source, Moser is mistaken. As stated above, it is the ALJ’s role to evaluate the record in its entirety, including medical opinions and testimony, and formulate a claimant’s RFC based on all the relevant, credible evidence of record.

Residual functional capacity is the most a claimant can still do despite physical or mental limitations.

Old v. Kijakazi · filed 2021-09-30(a)(1)

RFC is defined as the most a claimant can still do despite her physical or mental limitations. See 20 C.F.R. § 404.1545(a)(1).

Section 404.1545(a)(1) defines residual functional capacity as the most an individual can still do despite her limitations.

ANDERSON v. SAUL · filed 2021-09-30(a)(1)

RFC is defined as the most an individual can still do despite her limitations. 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1545(a)(1), 416.945(a)(1).

A mental residual functional capacity limiting a claimant to simple tasks is sufficient when the ALJ gives a valid explanation grounded in the evidence.

Galarza v. Colvin · filed 2021-09-30(a)(1)

Instead, the evaluation of a claimant’s ability to undertake the mental demands of the workplace will be viewed in the factual context of the case, and a mental RFC is sufficient if it is supported by a valid explanation grounded in the evidence.

An ALJ determines residual functional capacity by considering medical opinions and all other evidence in the case record.

Patton v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2021-10-01(a)(3)

An Administrative Law Judge makes this finding based on a consideration of medical opinions and all other evidence in the case record. 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1529, 404.1545(a)(3), 404.1546(c), 416.929, 416.945(a), 416.946(c).

Section 404.1545 requires an assessment of what a claimant can still do despite physical and mental limitations; the ALJ must account for supported limitations in that assessment.

Kurtz-Porter v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2021-10-05

If not, the ALJ must then assess the claimant’s residual functional capacity, which is defined as the most a person can do despite any physical and mental limitations that may affect what can be done in a work setting. 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1545, 416.945. ... The ALJ erred in providing some limitations related to Ms. Kurtz-Porter’s Raynaud’s phenomenon symptoms while ignoring others that were discussed by physicians.

An RFC assessment must have sufficient evidence to support the work limitations it assigns.

O'Neal v. Kijakazi · filed 2021-10-05(a)

In light of the “little weight” assigned to the opinions of Dr. Moniz and Dr. Trowbridge, there is not sufficient evidence in the record to substantiate the limitations contained in the RFC determination. The record does not contain additional medical opinions regarding O’Neal’s ability to function in the workplace. The Court will reverse and remand this action so that the ALJ can obtain a consultative examination and make a new RFC and credibility determination.

Section 404.1545 defines residual functional capacity as the work-related abilities a person retains despite limitations.

Young-Roach v. Social Security Administration · filed 2021-10-05(a)(1)

The RFC determination sets out an individual’s work-related abilities despite his or her limitations. See 20 C.F.R. § 404.1545(a)(1).

An ALJ must obtain more evidence when the record is insufficient to assess a claimant’s functional limitations.

Kellner v. Commissioner of Social Security Administration · filed 2021-10-05(a)(3)

The Court finds that the ALJ was obliged to obtain more evidence regarding Plaintiff’s functional limitations.

Section 404.1545(a) defines residual functional capacity as the most a claimant can still do despite limitations.

WAGNER v. SAUL · filed 2021-10-05(a)

RFC refers to the most a claimant can still do despite his limitations. 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1545(a), 416.945(a). ... I further find the ALJ’s RFC determination limiting Plaintiff to unskilled work3 is supported by substantial evidence.

Section 404.1545 calls for residual functional capacity to be assessed from the whole record, including how a claimant’s impairments limit work activities.

Marrs v. Commissioner, Social Security Administration · filed 2021-10-05

But RFC determinations are administrative assessments based upon the totality of the evidence. 20 C.F.R. § 404.1545. In conducting the RFC analysis, the Commissioner examines the whole record to determine the extent to which a claimant’s alleged impairments prevent participation in meaningful work activities.

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

Keller v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2021-10-08(a)(1)–(3)

An RFC determination is the most an individual can still do despite her limitations. 20 C.F.R. § 404.1545(a)(1). In assessing a claimant’s RFC, the ALJ must consider all the evidence in the record, including the limiting effects of all documented impairments, regardless of whether those impairments are severe or non-severe. Id. at § 404.1545(a)(1)–(3).

Residual functional capacity measures the most a claimant can still do despite physical and mental limitations, based on all relevant evidence.

Bernard v. Social Security Administration · filed 2021-10-08(a)(1)

Before going from step three to step four, the Commissioner evaluates the claimant's residual functional capacity56 by determining the most the claimant can still do despite his physical and mental limitations based on all relevant evidence in ... the record.

Section 404.1545(a) defines residual functional capacity as the most a claimant can do despite limitations; it is assessed between steps three and four.

Canales v. Saul · filed 2021-10-12(a)

RFC, which is determined between the third and fourth steps, is the most a claimant can do despite their limitations. 20 C.F.R. § 404.1545(a); Perez, 415 F.3d at 461-62. ... Here, the ALJ applied the appropriate legal standard when formulating the physical RFC determination.

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

Cortez v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2021-10-12(e)

The RFC is the most a claimant can do considering his limitations or restrictions, and the ALJ must consider the limiting effects of all of the claimant’s impairments, including those that are not severe, in assessing the RFC. ... Based on the VE’s testimony, Plaintiff’s inability to carry out instructions on a consistent basis, her reduced stress tolerance, and her attention, concentration, and attendance limitations described above would preclude her from performing the jobs identified by the VE or any unskilled and semi-skilled employment.

Section 404.1545(a)(1) requires an ALJ to assess residual functional capacity using the record as a whole, including credible testimony and medical source opinions.

Conley v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2021-10-12(a)(1)

The administrative law judge bases her residual functional capacity finding on a review of the record as a whole, including a claimant’s credible testimony and the opinions from a claimant’s medical sources. 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1545(a)(1), 416.945(a)(1). ... As stated previously, the RFC determination demonstrates that ALJ Thomas thoroughly considered the whole of the record evidence and does not indicate that she merely split the difference between Conyer’s opinion and those of Drs. Bornstein and Barnfield.

Section 404.1545(a)(3) requires an RFC assessment to consider all relevant medical and other evidence, including the claimant’s testimony and others’ observations.

Iglesias v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2021-10-14(a)(3)

This determination takes into account “all of the relevant medical and other evidence,” including the claimant’s own testimony and the observations of others. 20 C.F.R. § 404.1545(a)(3). ... The ALJ took into consideration Plaintiff’s daily activities, symptoms, medication, precipitating and aggravating factors, treatments, the objective medical findings, the consultative examination reports, and the functional limitations.

Section 404.1545 requires an RFC assessment to consider all medically determinable impairments and relevant evidence about their limitations.

BODENSCHATZ v. COMMISSIONER OF SOCIAL SECURITY · filed 2021-10-18(a)(3)-(4)

In assessing a claimant’s RFC, the ALJ is to consider all of a claimant’s medically determinable impairments, as well as all of the relevant evidence pertaining to those impairments, including medical records, statements from medical sources, and descriptions by the claimant of her limitations.

An RFC assessment must consider all relevant evidence and address the claimant’s medically determinable impairments.

Smith v. Commissioner of Social Security Administration · filed 2021-10-18(a)(1)

The RFC assessment should reflect consideration of all the relevant evidence and the ALJ should address all the claimant’s medically-determinable impairments.

Section 404.1545 requires an RFC assessment to consider all relevant evidence, including medical-source diagnoses, treatment, observations, and opinions.

Ross v. O'Malley · filed 2021-10-22

The Court concludes that the Administrative Law Judge (“ALJ”) failed to properly consider the medical evidence of record and erred in assessing Plaintiff’s Residual Functional Capacity (‘RFC”). ... An RFC determination must be based on all of the relevant evidence, including the diagnoses, treatment, observations, and opinions of medical sources, such as treating and examining physicians. 20 C.F.R. § 404.1545.

An ALJ must assess residual functional capacity using all relevant evidence, including medical records, medical opinions, and the claimant’s description of limitations.

Morales-Benitez v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2021-10-27(a)(1)

When formulating a claimant’s RFC, the ALJ must base his determination on all relevant evidence, including a claimant’s medical record, the medical opinions, and a claimant’s descriptions of his limitations. 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1545, 404.1546. ... Here, The ALJ formed the RFC based on all relevant evidence in the record—medical records, expert and doctor’s opinions, treatments, and Plaintiff’s own complaints and testimony. Hence, the ALJ’s RFC determination was based on substantial evidence and must be affirmed.

In assessing residual functional capacity, the ALJ considers subjective complaints of pain alongside objective medical records and medical opinions.

Bosick v. Kijakazi · filed 2021-10-15(a)(3)

In limiting Bosick to the sedentary category of exertion, the ALJ considered Bosick’s subjective complaints of pain as well as objective medical records and medical opinions.* See Cosme v. Comm'r Soc. Sec., 845 F. App'x 128, 134 (3d Cir. 2021) (citing 20 C.F.R. § 404.1545(a)(3)).

Section 404.1545(a)(3) requires the ALJ to consider all relevant medical and other evidence, including medical opinions, when assessing residual functional capacity.

Starr v. Commissioner of Social Security Administration · filed 2021-10-21(a)(3)

In assessing a claimant’s RFC, the ALJ considers all of the relevant medical and other evidence, including medical opinion evidence. 20 C.F.R. § 404.1545(a)(3); see 20 C.F.R. § 404.1527.

Section 404.1545(a)(3) requires an ALJ to base residual functional capacity on all relevant medical and other evidence, but does not require a written evaluation of every item.

Cook v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2021-10-28(a)(3)

An ALJ bases their RFC determination on “all of the relevant medical and other evidence” in the case record. Id. (a)(3). ... And, critically, an ALJ is not required to provide a written evaluation of every piece of evidence in the record, be it objective or subjective, in articulating his RFC determination.

Section 404.1545(a)(3) requires the ALJ to assess residual functional capacity using all evidence in the record, including statements from medical sources.

Ham v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2021-10-28(a)(3)

It is the responsibility of the ALJ to determine Plaintiff’s RFC based on all of the evidence in the record, including but not limited to, statements provided by medical sources.

Section 404.1545(b) requires the Commissioner to assess a claimant’s physical limitations and determine the claimant’s capacity for work on a regular and continuing basis.

Smith-Wine v. Saul · filed 2021-10-29(b)

The Commissioner is required to “first assess the nature and extent of [the claimant’s] physical limitations and then determine [the claimant’s] Residual Functional Capacity for work activity on a regular and continuing basis.” 20 C.F.R. § 404.1545(b).

Residual functional capacity is determined by considering all relevant medical and other evidence.

Archer-Larmon v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2021-11-01(a)(3)

The ALJ is responsible for determining the RFC, considering all relevant medical and other evidence in making that determination. 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1545(a)(3), 404.1546(c).

Section 404.1545(a)(3) requires an ALJ to assess residual functional capacity using all relevant medical and other evidence.

Harris v. Kijakazi · filed 2021-11-03(a)(3)

An ALJ is required to independently assess a claimant’s RFC “based on all of the relevant medical and other evidence.” See, e.g., 20 C.F.R. § 404.1545(a)(3) (emphasis supplied). ... The Court finds that the ALJ’s evaluation of the medical opinions and prior administrative medical findings is not supported by substantial evidence and that substantial evidence, as well, does not support the ALJ’s RFC assessment, which simply all but parroted the RFC findings of a state-agency consultant who did not have before her all the evidence of record for her consideration.

Section 404.1545 requires an RFC assessment to consider all relevant evidence, including a claimant’s written testimony about pain and the need to rest.

Vivian v. Kijakazi · filed 2021-11-17(a)(3)

Because it is not evident that the ALJ considered this relevant evidence in formulating the RFC, the Court remands for correction of this legal error.

Section 404.1545 requires an RFC assessment to consider all relevant evidence, including medical evidence and the claimant’s statements about limitations.

Emery v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2021-11-22

Judicial review of the ALJ’s decision rests on whether substantial evidence supports the RFC finding, which represents the most a claimant can do and takes all relevant evidence into account, including objective medical evidence, treatment, physicians’ opinions and observations, and Plaintiff’s own statements about his limitations.

Section 404.1545(a)(3) requires the ALJ to review all relevant medical and other evidence when determining residual functional capacity.

Caravello v. Saul · filed 2021-11-22(a)(3)

The ALJ is tasked with reviewing “all of the relevant medical and other evidence” to determine Plaintiffs RFC. 20 C.F.R. § 404.1545(a)(3).

An RFC assessment considers all relevant evidence and the claimant’s ability to meet the physical, mental, sensory, and other requirements of work.

Haws v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2021-11-23(a)(3), (a)(4)

An ALJ’s RFC assessment should be based on all relevant evidence and will consider the claimant’s ability to meet the physical, mental, sensory, and other requirements of work. 20 C.F.R. § 404.1545(a)(3) and (4).

An RFC assessment considers all medically determinable impairments and relevant evidence, including medical records, medical-source statements, and the claimant’s descriptions of limitations.

MECK v. COMMISSIONER OF SOCIAL SECURITY · filed 2021-11-30(a)(3)-(4)

In assessing a claimant’s RFC, the ALJ is to consider all of a claimant’s medically determinable impairments, as well as all of the relevant evidence pertaining to those impairments, including medical records, statements from medical sources, and descriptions by the claimant of her limitations, 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1545(a)(3)-(4).

In assessing residual functional capacity, the ALJ must consider all relevant evidence, including medical opinions.

Welch v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2021-11-05(a)(1), (a)(3)

In doing so, the ALJ must consider all relevant evidence, including, but not limited to, the medical opinions of the treating, examining, and non-examining medical sources. ... The ALJ’s decision shows that the ALJ considered the record as a whole. Claimant has not persuaded the Court otherwise. Thus, the Court finds no reversible error.

Section 404.1545(a) requires an ALJ assessing residual functional capacity to consider the entire record, including opinion evidence, nonsevere impairments, and the claimant’s limitations.

Fulkerson v. Saul · filed 2021-11-05(a)

Turning finally to Plaintiff's argument that the ALJ failed to sufficiently explain the RFC limitation on production pace, an ALJ must consider the entire record, including opinion evidence, impairments that are not severe, and any limitations the ALJ finds in determining Plaintiff's RFC.

Section 404.1545(a) permits an ALJ to consider daily activities and part-time work when assessing residual functional capacity.

LEVENTHAL v. SAUL · filed 2021-11-05(a)

However, activities of daily living and evidence of part-time work are both relevant factors that the ALJ is permitted to consider in forming her RFC.

Residual functional capacity measures the most a claimant can do on a sustained basis after accounting for physical and mental limitations.

Laird v. Saul · filed 2021-11-08(a)

The RFC represents the most an individual can do on a sustained basis after considering the effects of physical and/or mental limitations that affect the ability to perform work-related tasks. 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1545(a), 416.945(a). ... Because substantial evidence supports the RFC and because the ALJ presented a hypothetical question to the VE that reasonably incorporated the limitations included in the RFC, the Court affirms the ALJ’s step five finding.

Section 404.1545(a)(3) makes a claimant’s subjective complaints one of many factors considered in assessing residual functional capacity.

Pistole v. Social Security Administration, Commissioner of · filed 2021-11-10(a)(3)

As a threshold matter, a claimant’s subjective complaints are but one of many factors an ALJ is to consider when making the RFC finding. See 20 C.F.R. § 404.1545(a)(3).

Section 404.1545(b) requires the Commissioner to assess a claimant’s physical limitations before determining capacity for regular and continuing work activity.

Washington v. Saul · filed 2021-11-16(b)

The Commissioner is required to “first assess the nature and extent of [the claimant’s] physical limitations and then determine [the claimant’s] Residual Functional Capacity for work activity on a regular and continuing basis.” 20 C.F.R. § 404.1545(b).

Section 404.1545(a)(1) requires an RFC assessment based on all relevant evidence, including medical findings, treatment, and the claimant’s descriptions of limitations.

Sole v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2021-11-17(a)(1)

ALJ Allen appropriately assessed an RFC based on all relevant evidence, including objective medical evidence, medical history, clinical findings, prescribed treatment and claimant’s own descriptions of limitations. 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1545(a)(1), 416.945(a)(1); see also 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1513(a)(1)-(5), 416.913(a)(1)-(5).

Section 404.1545(a)(1) requires a residual functional capacity assessment to be based on all relevant evidence in the case file.

Montgomery v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2021-11-19(a)(1)

Regarding to Plaintiff’s second argument, a claimant’s RFC is an assessment of “the most [a claimant] can still do despite [his] limitations.” 20 C.F.R. § 404.1545(a)(1). A claimant’s RFC assessment must be based on all the relevant evidence in the case file.

Section 404.1545(a)(1) defines residual functional capacity as the most a claimant can still do despite limitations, assessed using all relevant evidence.

(SS) Rivera-Herrera v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2021-11-22(a)(1)

The RFC is “the most [one] can still do despite [his or her] limitations” and represents an assessment “based on all the relevant evidence.” 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1545(a)(1), 416.945(a)(1).

Residual functional capacity is assessed using all relevant medical and other evidence, including the claimant’s testimony.

Vance v. SSA · filed 2021-11-23(a)(3)

The Commissioner’s assessment is based upon all of the relevant medical evidence and other evidence in the record, including the claimant’s testimony. ... Vance makes conclusory assertions that the ALJ ignored or minimized the evidence; however, the ALJ’s decision adequately considered Vance’s medical history and reported treatments in determining that he has the RFC to perform light work.

Section 404.1545(a)(3) requires an RFC assessment based on all relevant medical and other evidence, including credible testimony, objective medical evidence, and medical opinions.

Johnson v. Saul · filed 2021-11-24(a)(3)

The claimant's RFC is determined based on all of the relevant medical and other evidence in the record, including the claimant's credible testimony, the objective medical evidence, and medical opinions from treating and consulting sources. 20 C.F.R. § 404.1545(a)(3).

An ALJ assesses residual functional capacity using the medical, testimonial, and other evidence in the record.

Green v. Saul · filed 2021-11-29(a)(1)

The ALJ determines a claimant’s RFC by looking at the entirety of the medical evidence, testimonial evidence, and other evidence in the record. See Gonzales v. Colvin, No. 3:15-CV-0685-D, 2016 WL 107843, at *9 (N.D. Tex. Jan. 11, 2016); 20 C.F.R. § 404.1545(a)(1).

Section 404.1545(a)(3) requires the ALJ to consider medical source statements and other record evidence when determining residual functional capacity.

Flanary v. SSA · filed 2021-11-29(a)(3)

The ALJ makes this determination based on a consideration of medical source statements and all other evidence in the case record.

An ALJ may assess residual functional capacity using the relevant evidence without basing the finding on a medical source opinion.

MOORE v. COMMISSIONER OF SOCIAL SECURITY · filed 2021-11-30(a)(3)

The ALJ was not required to premise the RFC finding on “an opinion from a medical source.”

Section 404.1545(a)(1) requires the ALJ to assess residual functional capacity using all relevant evidence, including lay witness statements.

Olson v. Saul · filed 2021-12-01(a)(1)

Because the ALJ must assess a claimant’s RFC “based on all the relevant evidence in [the] case record,” the ALJ’s failure to address the lay witness statement renders his decision unsupported by substantial evidence.

An RFC assessment considers all relevant evidence in the claimant’s record to determine capacity for work.

Marino v. Commissioner of Social Security Administration · filed 2021-12-10(a)

“The ALJ assesses a claimant’s RFC based on all the relevant evidence in [the] case record,” to determine the claimant’s capacity for work. Laborin v. Berryhill, 867 F.3d 1151, 1153 (9th Cir. 2017) (quotation marks and citation omitted); see 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1545(a), 416.945(a).

Section 404.1545(a) requires an ALJ assessing residual functional capacity to consider the entire record, including opinion evidence, nonsevere impairments, and identified limitations.

Holcombe v. Saul · filed 2021-12-15(a)

In determining RFC specifically, an ALJ must consider the entire record, including opinion evidence, impairments that are not severe, and any limitations the ALJ finds. 20 C.F.R. § 404.1545(a) (ordering the ALJ to consider the entire record); SSR 96-8p, 1996 WL 374184, at *1 (defining the RFC as an assessment of an individual’s ability to perform vocational-related physical and mental activities).

Section 404.1545(a)(3) bases residual functional capacity on all relevant medical and other evidence and permits consideration of a claimant’s description of limitations arising from symptoms.

Pender v. Kijakazi · filed 2021-12-15(a)(3)

The RFC is based on all relevant medical and other evidence in the record and may include a claimant’s own description of limitations arising from alleged symptoms. ... The ALJ considered Claimant’s testimony and the medical evidence of record, and the limitation to frequent lateral rotation of the neck is supported by substantial evidence.

Section 404.1545 requires an ALJ assessing residual functional capacity to consider medical evidence and the claimant’s subjective symptoms and limitations.

Elmer v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2021-12-15

In rendering an RFC determination, the ALJ must consider objective medical facts, diagnoses, and medical opinions based on such facts, as well as a plaintiff’s subjective symptoms, including pain and descriptions of other limitations.

An ALJ bases a residual functional capacity finding on medical source statements and all other evidence in the record.

Payne v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2021-12-17(a)(3)

The Administrative Law Judge makes this finding based on a consideration of medical source statements and all other evidence in the case record. 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1529, 404.1545(a)(3), 404.1546(c).

An RFC assessment must consider the relevant evidence of a claimant’s work limitations; an ALJ cannot derive it solely from the ALJ’s interpretation of medical records.

Dupre v. Social Security Administration · filed 2021-12-17(a)(3)

The RFC constitutes a function-by-function evaluation, including both exertional and non-exertional factors, based on all relevant evidence in the case record. § 404.1545(a)(3); SSR 96-8p, 1996 WL 374184, at *3–5. ... Moreover, the physical RFC in the record does not support the ALJ’s RFC determination, nor does the ALJ point to any medical opinion evidence by a treating or examining physician regarding the impact of Dupre’s physical impairments on her ability to work. Instead like in Williams and Ripley, the ALJ derived Dupre’s RFC based solely on the evidence of her claimed medical conditions and her interpretation of the medical records.

An RFC assessment must consider all relevant medical and other evidence, including fluctuations in symptoms caused by bipolar disorder.

Pinder v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2021-12-22(e)

To determine a plaintiff’s RFC, the ALJ must use all relevant medical and other evidence in the record. Phillips, 357 F.3d at 1238; 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1545(e), 416.945(e). ... Thus, the ALJ’s failure to consider these fluctuations results in a decision unsupported by substantial evidence.

Residual functional capacity is the most work-related activity a claimant can perform despite their limitations, assessed using all relevant evidence in the record.

Evans v. Kijakazi · filed 2021-12-28(a)(1)

RFC refers to the most work-related activities a claimant can perform despite their limitations and is to be assessed based on all the relevant evidence in the record. 20 C.F.R. § 404.1545(a)(1). ... And because the ALJ’s RFC assessment was supported by substantial evidence, her determination that Plaintiff is “not disabled” is affirmed.

An RFC assessment must be based on all relevant evidence in the case file.

Bowers v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2022-01-04(a)(1)

A claimant's RFC assessment must be based on all the relevant evidence in the case file. ... Plaintiff simply fails to identify any evidence supporting the need for such limitations.

An RFC assessment must consider all relevant evidence, including symptoms attributable to a medically determinable impairment, and account for both physical and mental limitations.

Smolek v. Commissioner Social Security Administration · filed 2022-01-10(a)(3), (a)(4)

In determining a claimant’s RFC, an ALJ must consider all relevant evidence in the record, including, inter alia, medical records, lay evidence, and “the effects of symptoms, including pain, that are reasonably attributed to a medically determinable impairment.” Robbins, 466 F.3d at 883, citing SSR 96-8p, 1996 WL 374184, at *5; 20 C.F.R. § 404.1545(a)(3); Smolen v. Chater, 80 F.3d 1273, 1281 (9th Cir. 1996). The RFC determination must account for both physical and mental limitations of the claimant. 20 C. F. R. § 404.1545(a)(4).

Section 404.1545 requires sufficient evidence of a claimant’s functional limitations to support an assessment of residual functional capacity.

Geoghan v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2022-01-12

I agree with this contention: given the absence of any reliable evidence concerning the extent of Plaintiff’s functional limitations, the ALJ had insufficient evidence from which to assess Plaintiff’s RFC.

Section 404.1545(a)(3) requires an RFC assessment to consider all relevant medical and other evidence.

Johnson v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2022-01-12(a)(3)

The ALJ is responsible for assessing a claimant’s RFC based on all of the relevant medical and other evidence. 20 C.F.R. § 404.1545(a)(3).

Section 404.1545(a)(1) bases a claimant’s residual functional capacity on all of the evidence, including evidence beyond medical findings.

Peeples v. Kijakazi · filed 2021-12-27(a)(1)

The assessment of a claimant’s work capacity is reserved solely to the ALJ and is based on all of the evidence, not just the medical evidence. Ripley, 67 F.3d at 557; 20 C.F.R. § 404.1545(a)(1), 416.945(a)(1); Social Security Ruling (SSR) 96-8p, 1996 WL 374184. Here, the ALJ addressed all of the evidence in assessing Plaintiff with an RFC for a reduced range of medium work.

Section 404.1545(a)(3) requires an ALJ to consider all relevant medical and other evidence when assessing residual functional capacity.

Powers v. Commissioner of Social Security Administration · filed 2021-12-28(a)(3)

In assessing residual functional capacity, an ALJ should scrutinize “all of the relevant medical and other evidence.” 20 C.F.R. § 404.1545(a)(3). ... The ALJ’s discussion of the record allows for meaningful review of these findings, her decision is supported by substantial evidence, and remand is not necessary.

Section 404.1545(a)(3) requires an ALJ to use all relevant medical and other evidence when assessing residual functional capacity.

Vicena v. Saul · filed 2021-12-29(a)(3)

While the task of assessing a claimant’s RFC is reserved to the Commissioner and not a medical expert, an ALJ must utilize “all of the relevant medical and other evidence” in the record to assess a claimant’s RFC.

Section 404.1545(a) requires the ALJ to assess residual functional capacity using all relevant medical and nonmedical evidence.

Anderson v. Saul · filed 2021-12-29(a)

It is the ALJ’s responsibility to determine a claimant’s RFC by evaluating all medical and non-medical evidence of record.

Residual functional capacity is the most a claimant can still do despite physical or mental limitations.

Moskalski v. Kijakazi · filed 2021-12-29(a)(1)

RFC is defined as the most a claimant can still do despite her physical or mental limitations.

Section 404.1545(a)(1) defines residual functional capacity as the most a claimant can still do despite her limitations.

Glass-Kidd v. Commissioner, Social Security · filed 2021-12-30(a)(1)

A plaintiff’s RFC represents “the most [she] can still do despite [her] limitations.” 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1545(a)(1), 416.945(a)(1).

An ALJ considers the functional limitations resulting from a claimant’s conditions when assessing residual functional capacity.

Willis v. Commissioner of the Social Security Administration · filed 2021-12-30(a)(1)

An ALJ needs only to consider the resultant functional limitations arising from the condition, if any, to formulate Plaintiff’s RFC. See 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1545(a)(1), 416.945(a)(1).

Section 404.1545 requires an ALJ to consider all known medically determinable impairments and all relevant medical and other evidence when assessing residual functional capacity.

Roy v. Commissioner of Social Security Administration · filed 2022-01-04(a)(2)–(3)

Instead, the ALJ properly evaluated all of the medical evidence and opinion statements in view of all of Plaintiff’s impairments when determining Plaintiff’s RFC. ... 20 C.F.R. § 404.1545 requires an ALJ is to “consider all of [the claimant’s] medically determinable impairments of which [the ALJ] is aware” in determining a claimant’s RFC. Id. § 404.1545(a)(2). An ALJ must determine the claimant’s RFC “based on all of the relevant medical and other evidence” in the record. Id. § 404.1545(a)(3).

Section 404.1545(a) requires an RFC assessment to consider all relevant evidence, including medical records, medical opinions, and the claimant’s account of his limitations.

MICHEL v. COMMISSIONER OF SOCIAL SECURITY · filed 2022-01-07(a)

The assessment must be based upon all of the relevant evidence, including the medical records, medical source opinions, and the individual’s subjective allegations and description of his own limitations. Id. ... Thus, contrary to Plaintiff’s argument otherwise, I find the ALJ did not ignore or fail to properly discuss the evidence as it relates to his left shoulder impairment.

Section 404.1545(a)(3) requires the ALJ to consider all relevant medical and other evidence when assessing residual functional capacity, including statements and observations about the claimant’s limitations.

Matos v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2022-01-10(a)(3)

The ALJ examines all relevant medical and other evidence, including “any statements about what [the claimant] can still do that have been provided by medical sources” and “descriptions and observations” by the claimant, her family, her neighbors, her friends, or others, of her limitations, including limitations resulting from pain. ... A review of the medical evidence, however, shows that the ALJ’s RFC determination was supported by substantial evidence.

Section 404.1545(a)(1) defines residual functional capacity as what a claimant can still do despite limitations, based on all relevant evidence.

(SS) Juanita Jones v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2022-01-10(a)(1)

The RFC is “the most [one] can still do despite [his or her] limitations” and represents an assessment “based on all the relevant evidence.” 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1545(a)(1), 416.945(a)(1).

Section 404.1545 requires the ALJ to consider all relevant medical and other evidence, including limitations caused by symptoms, when assessing residual functional capacity.

Marshall v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2022-01-10(a)(3), (d)

To determine a claimant’s residual functional capacity, the ALJ must consider “all of the relevant medical and other evidence,” “including limitations that result from . . . symptoms.”

Section 404.1545(a)(3) requires the ALJ to assess residual functional capacity using the evidence as a whole.

Abuhamra v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2022-01-10(a)(3)

As discussed above, the ALJ is responsible for formulating the RFC based on the evidence as a whole. See Matta, 508 F. App’x at 56; 20 C.F.R. § 404.1545(a)(3).

Section 404.1545(a)(1) defines residual functional capacity as a claimant’s ability to work despite impairments.

Lantz v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2022-01-10(a)(1)

The RFC is an assessment of a claimant’s ability to do work despite his impairments.

Section 404.1545(a) defines residual functional capacity as the most a claimant can still do despite limitations.

LAFACE v. SAUL · filed 2022-01-11(a)

RFC refers to the most a claimant can still do despite his/her limitations. 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1545(a), 416.945(a). ... Rather, the ALJ partially credited Plaintiff’s allegations and testimony and crafted an RFC based on the same and the record as a whole. After a review of the record, I find that I am able to sufficiently discern the basis for the ALJ’s opinion regarding Plaintiff’s ability to sit / stand and walk such that I am able to make a proper and meaningful review.

Section 404.1545 measures residual functional capacity by the most work a claimant can perform.

Collins v. Commissioner, Social Security Administration · filed 2022-01-12

A claimant’s RFC is the most work the claimant can perform, not the least. 20 C.F.R. § 404.1545; SSR 83-10.

Section 404.1545 permits the ALJ to determine residual functional capacity from the record as a whole, including medical opinions and other evidence.

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

But the ALJ considered the RFC opinion of the State agency consultants and fashioned an RFC based on the record as a whole. This is what the ALJ was supposed to do.

Section 404.1545 requires an ALJ assessing residual functional capacity to consider objective medical facts, diagnoses, medical opinions, and the claimant’s subjective symptoms and limitations.

Bates v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2022-01-14

In rendering an RFC determination, the ALJ must consider objective medical facts, diagnoses, and medical opinions based on such facts, as well as a plaintiff’s subjective symptoms, including pain and descriptions of other limitations.

Section 404.1545(a) requires an RFC assessment to consider all relevant evidence, including medical records, medical opinions, and the claimant’s account of their limitations.

MCCRACKEN v. KIJAZAKI · filed 2022-01-14(a)

The assessment must be based upon all of the relevant evidence, including the medical records, medical source opinions, and the individual’s subjective allegations and description of his/her own limitations.

An RFC assessment must consider all relevant evidence, including medical records, medical opinions, and the claimant’s description of limitations.

HARRIS v. KIJAKAZI · filed 2022-01-19(a)

RFC refers to the most a claimant can still do despite his/her limitations. 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1545(a), 416.945(a). The assessment must be based upon all of the relevant evidence, including the medical records, medical source opinions, and the individual’s subjective allegations and description of his/her own limitations. Id. ... Given the circumstances of this case, that is exactly what the ALJ did.

Section 404.1545(a) requires an ALJ to assess residual functional capacity using all relevant evidence.

WALTERS v. KIJAZAKI · filed 2022-01-21(a)

An ALJ is charged with formulating the RFC based on all of the relevant evidence. ... After a careful review, I find that is exactly what the ALJ did.

Section 404.1545(a)(3) requires an ALJ assessing residual functional capacity to consider all relevant medical and other evidence.

Johnson v. Social Security Administration · filed 2022-01-25(a)(3)

In assessing the claimant’s RFC, the ALJ must assess the whole record which includes “all of the relevant medical and other evidence.” 20 C.F.R. § 404.1545(a)(3); see Callaway, 292 F. Supp. 3d at 297 (explaining that the ALJ must “evaluate the claimant’s statements as well as ‘all [of] the available evidence,’ including the ‘claimant’s medical history, medical signs and laboratory findings; objective medical evidence of pain; the medical opinions of the claimant’s treating physician[s]; and any other evidence that bears on the severity of the pain’” (quoting Butler, 353 F.3d at 1004)).

Section 404.1545(a)(3) requires an ALJ to determine residual functional capacity from all relevant medical and other evidence the claimant provides.

LOWTHER v. COMMISSIONER OF SOCIAL SECURITY · filed 2022-01-25(a)(3)

An ALJ determines a claimant’s RFC “based on all of the relevant medical and other evidence” the claimant provides. 20 C.F.R. § 404.1545((a)(3). ... Accordingly, this Court finds that substantial evidence supported ALJ Ayers’ RFC determination and conclusion that Plaintiff can perform light work.

Section 404.1545(a)(3) requires an RFC assessment based on all relevant medical and other evidence; alleged mental limitations need not be included when the record supports their omission.

Sands v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2022-01-25(a)(3)

The ALJ is responsible for assessing a claimant’s RFC “based on all of the relevant medical and other evidence.” 20 C.F.R. § 404.1545(a)(3). ... The ALJ’s RFC determination, which does not include any limitations from alleged mental impairments, is supported by substantial evidence.

An ALJ bases the residual functional capacity finding on medical source statements and all other evidence in the case record.

Ball v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2022-01-14(a)(3)

The Administrative Law Judge makes this finding based on a consideration of medical source statements and all other evidence in the case record.

Section 404.1545(a) defines residual functional capacity as a claimant’s maximum remaining ability to perform sustained work in an ordinary work setting on a regular and continuing basis.

GARDA v. COMMISSIONER OF SOCIAL SECURITY · filed 2022-01-17(a)

An individual’s RFC is an assessment of maximum remaining ability to do sustained work activities in an ordinary work setting on a regular and continuing basis. 20 C.F.R. § 404.1545(a); SSR 96-8p. ... As such, the Court finds that there is substantial evidence the ALJ properly considered the evidence.

Residual functional capacity measures what a claimant can still do despite limitations; general reports of pain do not by themselves require work-preclusive limits.

(SS) Carbajal v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2022-01-19(a)(1)

The RFC is not a representation of the most a claimant can do while remaining completely pain free. To the contrary, the RFC is “the most you can still do despite your limitations.” See 20 C.F.R. § 404.1545(a)(1). Thus, generalized statements of pain worsened with activity are not statements which, if credited as true, would mandate the inclusion of work-preclusive limitations in the RFC.

Section 404.1545(a)(3) requires an ALJ to consider all relevant medical and other evidence when assessing residual functional capacity.

Warren v. Commissioner of Social Security Administration · filed 2022-01-19(a)(3)

In assessing residual functional capacity, an ALJ should scrutinize “all of the relevant medical and other evidence.” 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1545(a)(3) 416.945(a)(3). ... Here, the ALJ has failed to explain how the evidence supports his conclusion and meaningful review is frustrated.

Section 404.1545(a) defines residual functional capacity as the most a claimant can still do despite physical and mental limitations from impairments.

Shover v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2022-01-21(a)

A plaintiff’s RFC “is defined as the most a [plaintiff] can still do despite the physical and mental limitations resulting from her impairments.”

Claimants are responsible for providing the evidence used to determine their residual functional capacity, including treatment notes supporting a medical opinion.

Hubbard v. Commissioner, Social Security Administration · filed 2022-01-21(a)(3)

This argument is unavailing for two reasons. First, claimants are “responsible for providing the evidence [the ALJ] will use to make a finding about [their RFC].” 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1545(a)(3), 416.945(a)(3).

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

Sutton v. Kijakazi · filed 2022-01-24(a)(2)

This distinction is critical because in assessing a claimant’s RFC, the ALJ considers only those impairments found to be medically determinable, even if not deemed severe.

Section 404.1545(a)(1) defines residual functional capacity as the maximum work a claimant can perform despite limitations.

Centeno v. Kijakazi · filed 2022-01-24(a)(1)

A claimant’s residual functional capacity is the maximum work that she can perform despite any limitations. 20 C.F.R. §404.1545(a)(1). The assessment “must be ... based on all the relevant evidence in the record.” Young v. Barnhart, 362 F.3d 995, 1001 (7th Cir. 2004). As more fully discussed below, the ALJ’s determination of Centeno’s residual functional capacity is supported by substantial evidence.

Section 404.1545(a)(3) requires the ALJ to consider all relevant evidence when assessing residual functional capacity, including assessments by medical experts.

Carriker v. Saul · filed 2022-01-24(a)(3)

In making this determination, the ALJ considers all relevant evidence, including residual functional capacity determinations made by consultative examiners, agency experts, and other doctors. See 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1513(c), 404.1545(a)(3), 416.913(c), 416.945(a)(3). ... The Court finds that the ALJ thoughtfully considered not only the expert opinions and limitations submitted from Drs. Short, Kotler, and Patterson, but also weighed them alongside the available evidence, including Plaintiff’s testimony and her treatment records.

Section 404.1545 requires the ALJ to determine residual functional capacity from all relevant evidence; the finding need not track any one medical opinion.

Klipfel v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2022-01-24

The ALJ reaches a claimant’s RFC based on all of the relevant evidence, including medical records, statements by physicians, and a claimant’s description of his limitations. 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1545, 416.945. It is axiomatic that the ALJ’s RFC finding need not track any one medical opinion.

Section 404.1545 does not require an ALJ to include vague, undefined difficulties in a residual functional capacity assessment when they do not establish functional limitations.

Fair v. Saul · filed 2022-01-25(a)(1)

Regardless, the ALJ certainly was not required to incorporate Dr. Russell’s non-specific/undefined “difficulties” in her RFC assessment (or give his opinion more than some weight) because those undefined “difficulties” do not constitute valid limitations.