20 C.F.R. § 404.1545

Section 404.1545(a) requires an ALJ to assess residual functional capacity using all relevant medical and other evidence, not just medical opinions.

Hauser v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2022-06-10(a)

The ALJ “will assess your residual functional capacity based on all of the relevant medical and other evidence,” not just medical opinions.

An ALJ must consider all relevant evidence when assessing residual functional capacity; an omitted statement does not require remand unless it could affect the outcome.

ESSAY v. KIJAKAZI · filed 2022-06-14(a)(1)

ALJs have a duty to “consider all relevant evidence” when they formulate a claimant’s RFC. ... To warrant remand, a claimant must explain how the overlooked evidence would have “made any difference” in the outcome of his or her case.

An ALJ may assess residual functional capacity from all relevant medical and other evidence without a supporting medical opinion.

Gruber v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2022-06-16(a)(3)

Furthermore, an ALJ is permitted to craft an RFC based on medical records and other evidence, without a supportive medical opinion at all.

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

McDuffie v. Kijakazi · filed 2022-06-22(a)(3)

The RFC assessment is based on “all of the relevant medical and other evidence.” 20 C.F.R. § 404.1545(a)(3). It represents the most, not the least, a claimant can still do despite his or her limitations. 20 C.F.R. § 404.1545; SSR 96-8p, 1996 WL 374184, at *2 (emphasis added). Having reviewed and considered the medical records and other evidence in the record, the Court finds that substantial evidence supports the ALJ’s finding that McDuffie could occasionally understand, remember, and carry out detailed instructions.

Section 404.1545 directs an ALJ to assess residual functional capacity using all relevant record evidence, including the claimant’s statements and medical opinions.

Ash v. Saul · filed 2022-06-02

An ALJ develops RFC based on all relevant evidence of record, including the claimant’s subjective statements about her limitations and medical opinion evidence.

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

KERCH v. COMMISSIONER OF SOCIAL SECURITY · filed 2022-06-02(a)(3)

In assessing the claimant’s RFC, the “Commissioner examines ‘all of the relevant medical and other evidence’ to make its RFC determination.” Id. (quoting 20 C.F.R. § 404.1545(a)(3)). ... Given the foregoing, the Court finds that the ALJ’s RFC finding is supported by substantial evidence because the ALJ’s RFC determination provides that Kerch can perform a full range of work, at all exertional levels, with certain enumerated non-exertional limitations contained therein.

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

Collins v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2022-06-06(a)(1)

A claimant’s RFC is the level of physical and mental work she can consistently perform despite her limitations. 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1545(a)(1). ... Thus, substantial evidence supports the ALJ’s conclusion that Ms. Collins could perform a reduced range of light work prior to her date last insured.

Section 404.1545 permits an ALJ to synthesize medical limitations into a residual functional capacity without matching each restriction word for word to a medical opinion.

Wheeler v. Kijakazi · filed 2022-06-06(a)(1)

The ALJ was not required to phrase the RFC so that each postural limitation word-for-word matched a specific recommendation from one of the medical experts.

An ALJ must consider all relevant record evidence, including medical and lay evidence, when determining a claimant’s residual functional capacity.

Pierman v. Saul · filed 2022-06-07(a)(3)

In determining a claimant’s RFC, an ALJ must consider all relevant evidence in the record, including medical records, lay evidence, and “the effects of symptoms, including pain, that are reasonably attributed to a medically determinable impairment.” See SSR 96–8p; 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1545(a)(3), 416.945(a)(3). ... Because the Court finds that the ALJ’s decision was without error, the RFC assessment is not flawed.

An ALJ must support a residual functional capacity assessment with substantial evidence, though the ALJ need not rely on any particular medical opinion or record.

Gabriel v. Kijakazi · filed 2022-06-09(a)(1)

While an ALJ is not required to rely on any particular opinion or medical record, he or she must support the RFC with substantial evidence.

Residual functional capacity is based on medical evidence and other evidence, including the claimant’s testimony.

Ajayi v. Saul · filed 2022-06-10(a)(3)

It is based upon the medical evidence in the record and other evidence, including the claimant’s testimony. 20 C.F.R. § 404.1545(a)(3).

Residual functional capacity measures the most a claimant can do despite limitations, rather than the work a claimant can do without pain.

(SS) Xiong v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2022-06-13(a)(1)

The RFC is not the least one can do while remaining pain free, but the most one can do despite one’s limitations.

When the record lacks evidence needed to assess work-related mental limitations, an ALJ must develop it before determining RFC from her own lay assessment of medical evidence.

Taggart v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2022-06-13(a)

On this record, the ALJ was not permitted to rely on her own lay assessment of the medical evidence to assess Plaintiff’s RFC. Instead, there was a gap in the record that she was required to fill.

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

Young v. Kijakazi · filed 2022-06-14(a)(1)

If the claimant does not meet or equal a listing, the ALJ proceeds to step four and assesses the claimant’s residual functional capacity (“RFC”), defined as the most the claimant can still do despite their imitations (20 C.F.R. § 404.1545(a)(1)), and determines whether they are able to perform past relevant work, defined as “work that [the claimant has] done within the past 15 years, that was substantial gainful activity, and that lasted long enough for [the claimant] to learn to do it.” 20 C.F.R. § 404.1560(b)(1).

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

Dragoo v. Social Security Administration, Commissioner of · filed 2022-06-14(a)(1)

A plaintiff’s RFC is based on how plaintiff’s physical and mental limitations affect her ability to work and is “the most [a plaintiff] can still do despite [those] limitations.” 20 C.F.R. § 404.1545(a)(1); see also SSR 96-8p, 1996 WL 374184 at *2 (“RFC is what an individual can still do despite his or her limitations.”). ... The record contains substantial evidence to support the ALJ’s findings.

An ALJ must formulate residual functional capacity based on all relevant evidence.

FORD v. KIJAKAZI · filed 2022-06-14(a)

An ALJ is charged with formulating a claimant’s RFC based on all of the relevant evidence. See 20 C.F.R. § 404.1545(a).

Section 404.1545(a) requires the ALJ to consider physical and mental abilities, symptoms, and other limitations that could interfere with regular, continuing work when assessing residual functional capacity.

Mortensen v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2022-06-15(a)

In making an RFC assessment, the ALJ should consider “a claimant’s physical abilities, mental abilities, symptomology, including pain and other limitations which could interfere with work activities on a regular and continuing basis.” Pardee v. Astrue, 631 F. Supp. 2d 200, 221 (N.D.N.Y. 2009) (citing 20 C.F.R. § 404.1545(a)).

When formulating residual functional capacity, the ALJ must consider all impairments and the extent to which they are consistent with medical evidence.

Gutierrez v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2022-06-16(a)(2)

In formulating a claimant’s RFC, the ALJ must consider all impairments and the extent to which the impairments are consistent with medical evidence. 20 C.F.R. § 404.1545(a)(2).

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

Huey v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2022-06-17(a)(3)

Thus, contrary to plaintiff’s argument, the Court finds that the the ALJ appropriately considered “all of the relevant medical and other evidence” in determining plaintiff’s RFC, See Blash v. Comm’r of Soc. Sec’y, 813 Fed. App’x 642, 644 (2d Cir. 2020), quoting 20 C.F.R. § 404.1545(a)(3), and that his determination that plaintiff was capable of performing semi-skilled work that is things oriented, with no more than occasional interaction with the public, is supported by substantial evidence.

Section 404.1545(a)(1) defines residual functional capacity as what a claimant can still do despite limitations; supported physical and mental limitations must be reflected when assessing work capacity.

Bruggeman v. Kijakazi · filed 2022-06-22(a)(1)

A claimant’s RFC is the most that one can do despite his or her limitations. 20 C.F.R. § 404.1545(a)(1). ... Further, when asked about the elevation of his legs each day, the VE testified that “those jobs would not be possible.” Id. The overwhelming evidence presented in terms of both Bruggeman’s mental and physical disabilities leads the Court to conclude that he is disabled and unable to work. The ALJ has failed to present substantial evidence that Bruggeman is able to do any significant work in the economy, as an “addressor” or any other job.

Section 404.1545(a)(3) requires the ALJ to evaluate medical evidence when assessing residual functional capacity, including by weighing radiologists’ interpretations against other findings.

Brown v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2022-06-10(a)(3)

In evaluating these reports in the RFC analysis section of the decision (Doc. 11-2, PageID 62-63), the ALJ did not interpret the objective medical data beyond her ability. As discussed above, the regulations require the ALJ to evaluate the medical evidence to determine whether Plaintiff is disabled. See 20 C.F.R. § 404.1545(a)(3); Webb, 368 F.3d at 633; Coldiron, 391 F. App’x at 439.

Section 404.1545(a) requires the ALJ to consider the whole record when assessing a claimant’s residual functional capacity.

Shiner v. Saul · filed 2022-06-23(a)

Here, the ALJ was required to utilize the whole record, not only the medical opinions, in formulating Petitioner’s RFC.

Section 404.1545(a)(1) requires the ALJ to assess residual functional capacity based on all relevant evidence; the finding need not match a particular medical opinion.

Reyes v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2022-06-23(a)(1)

Rather, the ALJ is to assess the claimant’s RFC “based on all the relevant evidence in your case record.” 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1545(a)(1), 416.945(a)(1). For the reasons discussed in this opinion, the ALJ has fulfilled his legal obligations.

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

Canty v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2022-06-24(a)(3)

In evaluating a claimant’s RFC, an ALJ is expected to take into consideration all of the relevant evidence, including both medical and non- medical evidence. See 20 C.F.R. § 404.1545(a)(3).

Section 404.1545 requires an RFC assessment based on all relevant evidence, including medical findings, treatment records, medical opinions, and the claimant’s daily activities.

Levill v. Kijakazi · filed 2022-06-28

In addition to considering those two medical opinions, the ALJ developed the RFC based on all relevant evidence of record including imaging, frequently normal examination findings, minimal and conservative mental health treatment, notes from treating providers, opinions from other state agency consultants’, and Plaintiff’s reported activities of daily living.

Section 404.1545(a) requires an ALJ to evaluate relevant evidence, including limitations in concentration, persistence, and pace, when determining residual functional capacity.

Streikus v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2022-07-01(a)

An ALJ must evaluate all relevant evidence when determining a claimant’s RFC, including any deficiencies in concentration, persistence, or maintaining pace. 20 C.F.R. § 404.1545(a); O’Connor-Spinner v. Astrue, 627 F.3d 614, 619 (7th Cir. 2010). ... By relying on multiple treatment notes and opinions in determining Mr. S.’s RFC limitations, the ALJ supported her RFC determination with substantial evidence.

Section 404.1545 requires an RFC finding to consider all record evidence, including the claimant’s testimony, treatment records, and medical opinions.

Ryan v. Saul · filed 2022-07-06

All the relevant evidence supports the ALJ’s RFC determination. An ALJ's RFC finding is based on all of the record evidence, not solely the Plaintiff’s testimony.

An ALJ assessing residual functional capacity must consider all relevant evidence, including medical opinions relevant to the period assessed.

Lucero v. Social Security Administration · filed 2022-06-28(a)(1)

First, the ALJ must consider all of the relevant evidence and determine what is “the most [the claimant] can still do despite [his physical and mental] limitations.” 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1545(a)(1), 416.945(a)(1). ... First, the ALJ erred by failing to consider Dr. Baum’s opinions in assessing Mr. Lucero’s first RFC.

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

Farmer v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2022-07-07(a)(3)

In determining a claimant’s RFC, the ALJ considers medical source statements and all other evidence of record. 20 C.F.R. § 404.1545(a)(3).

An RFC assessment must address evidence that a claimant needs a cane and explain the decision to omit a cane limitation.

Rewitzer v. Kijakazi · filed 2022-07-08

Because the Commissioner has not addressed Plaintiff’s prescription for a cane as an assistive device, nor explained why she accepts or rejects the evidence regarding whether Plaintiff requires the use of that device, and under what circumstances, the Court cannot meaningfully review the Commissioner’s decision to exclude cane use from Plaintiff’s RFC and analyze whether substantial evidence supports the AC’s conclusions formulated under the correctly applied legal standards.

Section 404.1545(a)(3) directs the ALJ to consider all relevant medical and other evidence and resolve conflicts in assessing residual functional capacity.

DEL GRIPPO v. COMMISSIONER OF SOCIAL SECURITY · filed 2022-07-13(a)(3)

The ALJ reviews “all of the relevant medical and other evidence” in the record and resolves conflicts in the evidence in determining the claimant’s RFC. 20 C.F.R. § 404.1545(a)(3). ... Accordingly, substantial evidence supports the ALJ’s conclusion with respect to Plaintiff’s exertional abilities.

Section 404.1545(a)(1) requires an ALJ to assess residual functional capacity using all relevant evidence, not just medical opinions.

O'Connell v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2022-07-13(a)(1)

Indeed, it is the very duty of the ALJ to formulate an RFC based on all relevant evidence, not just medical opinions, in Plaintiff’s record.

Residual functional capacity is assessed based on all relevant medical and other evidence.

Krieg v. Commissioner of the Social Security Administration · filed 2022-07-18(a)(3)

The RFC is assessed “based on all of the relevant medical and other evidence.” 20 C.F.R. §404.1545(a)(3).

Residual functional capacity is based on medical evidence and other evidence, including testimony from the claimant and people who know her.

Bunch v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2022-07-21(a)(3)

The RFC is based upon medical evidence – including statements from medical sources about what the claimant still can do – as well as “other evidence, such as testimony by the claimant or his friends and family.” Craft v. Astrue, 539 F.3d 668, 676 (7th Cir. 2008); 20 C.F.R. § 404.1545(a)(3).

In determining residual functional capacity, the ALJ considers medical source statements and all other evidence of record.

Gregory v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2022-07-22(a)(3)

In determining a claimant’s RFC, the ALJ considers medical source statements and all other evidence of record. 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1545(a)(3), 416.945(a)(3). ... In short, the ALJ properly weighed the medical evidence, drew appropriate inferences, and made findings in formulating Plaintiff’s RFC that are supported by substantial evidence.

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

DENNIS v. COMMISSIONER OF SOCIAL SECURITY · filed 2022-07-26(a)

In determining an individual’s RFC at Step Four, the ALJ must consider all relevant evidence—including “medical records, observations made during formal medical examinations, descriptions of limitations by the claimant and others, and observations of the claimant’s limitations by others.” Fargnoli v. Massanari, 247 F.3d 34, 41 (3d Cir. 2001) (citing 20 C.F.R. § 404.1545(a)); see 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1527(e)(2), 404.1545(a), 404.1546; Burnett, 220 F.3d at 121.

Section 404.1545(a)(1) requires an RFC assessment to reflect the most a claimant can do despite her limitations and to be based on all relevant evidence.

Nader v. Saul · filed 2022-07-27(a)(1)

The RFC measures the maximum a person can do despite her limitations and must be based on “all the relevant evidence” in the record. 20 C.F.R. § 404.1545(a)(1); see also Pepper v. Colvin, 712 F.3d 351, 362 (7th Cir. 2013). ... The court finds that the ALJ sufficiently discussed Sharon’s headaches and supported her RFC with substantial evidence.

Section 404.1545 permits an ALJ to consider observations of gait, strength, and muscle bulk when assessing RFC and requires consideration of all record-established functional limitations.

LANZILOTTI v. SAUL · filed 2022-07-29

The ALJ here was within her authority to consider observations of a normal gait, tandem walk, motor strength and bulk in determining Plaintiff’s RFC, and all of his record established functional limitations, and not just those directly attributable to his cervical degenerative disc disease.

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

Henry v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2022-08-01(a)(3)

An ALJ bases his RFC determination on “all of the relevant medical and other evidence” in the case record. Id. (a)(3). ... ALJ McMahon thoroughly considered Plaintiff’s medical records, hearing testimony, and reports of daily activities and subjective complaints. ALJ McMahon adequately articulated her findings in accordance with the regulations and the undersigned finds no error.

Section 404.1545(a) requires an RFC assessment based on all relevant evidence, including medical records, physician observations, and the claimant’s description of her limitations.

Pursell v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2022-08-02(a)

However, a review of the ALJ’s decision plainly demonstrates that the ALJ properly formulated Plaintiff’s RFC only after evaluating Plaintiff’s subjective symptoms and extensively discussing the relevant evidence, including her testimony, the medical evidence, and her daily activities.

Section 404.1545(a)(3) requires the ALJ to assess all relevant evidence, including medical reports and subjective descriptions of limitations, when determining residual functional capacity.

Parrott v. Social Security Administration, Commissioner · filed 2022-08-08(a)(3)

Accordingly, the record shows that the ALJ accounted for the medical evidence as well as Plaintiff’s subjective complaints in assessing her RFC, and substantial evidence supports the ALJ’s conclusion.

Section 404.1545(a)(1) requires an ALJ to assess residual functional capacity using all relevant evidence in the claimant’s record, rather than simply adopting a doctor’s opinion.

Wareing v. Commisioner of Social Security · filed 2022-08-08(a)(1)

Although Plaintiff argues the ALJ erred by not adopting the opinion of Dr. Hanshaw, the assessment of a claimant’s RFC is “based on all the relevant evidence in [the claimant’s] case record,” and not simply on a doctor’s opinion. 20 C.F.R. § 404.1545(a)(1).

An RFC assessment must consider all relevant medical and nonmedical evidence, including the claimant’s statements.

Forbes v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2022-08-09(a)(3)

The [RFC] assessment is based upon consideration of all relevant evidence in the case record, including medical evidence and relevant nonmedical evidence, ... an individual’s own statement of what he or she is able or unable to do, and many other factors that could help the adjudicator determine the most reasonable findings in light of all the evidence. ... Ultimately, the ALJ adequately explained his reasoning, building “an accurate and logical bridge from evidence to [his] conclusion . . . ,” Chase, 458 F. App’x at 556-57, and his analysis is not “patently wrong,” Hall, 906 F.3d at 644.

Section 404.1545 requires the Commissioner to consider all relevant record evidence when assessing residual functional capacity.

VanDyke v. Kijakazi · filed 2022-08-09

When assessing a plaintiff’s RFC, the Commissioner must consider all relevant evidence in the record. ... Plaintiff has not pointed to evidence in the record that the AC and ALJ left unconsidered in their analyses.

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

MCNABB, JR. v. COMMISSIONER OF SOCIAL SECURITY · filed 2022-08-09(a)(3)

The ALJ reviews “all of the relevant medical and other evidence” in the record and resolves conflicts in the evidence in determining the plaintiff’s RFC. 20 C.F.R. § 404.1545(a)(3).

An RFC assessment may consider treatment notes and nonmedical evidence, including the claimant’s statements and daily activities.

Rodriguez v. Saul, Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2022-08-09(a)(3)

Such evidence may include treatment notes as well as nonmedical evidence, including the Plaintiff’s statements and activities of daily living. See 20 C.F.R. § 404.1545(a)(3); see also Monroe, 676 F. App'x at 9.

An ALJ may consider a claimant’s daily activities when assessing residual functional capacity from the record as a whole.

Davis v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2022-08-11(a)

Review of the ALJ’s decision demonstrates that she properly formulated plaintiff’s RFC based upon her review of the entire record as a whole, including his extensive daily activities.

Section 404.1545 requires the ALJ to consider all relevant medical evidence when assessing residual functional capacity, including evidence contrary to a finding of non-disability.

Fain v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2022-08-02(a)(3)

The ALJ erred in cherry-picking evidence throughout the decision. On remand, the ALJ must properly consider and analyze all of the relevant medical evidence, including evidence contrary to a finding of non-disability.

Section 404.1545(a)(3) requires an RFC assessment based on all relevant evidence; the assessment need not mirror any particular medical opinion.

(SS) Gilbert v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2022-08-08(a)(3)

In formulating the RFC the ALJ’s task is not simply to pick between the opinions in the record. The RFC need not mirror any particular opinion, it is an assessment formulated by the ALJ based on all relevant evidence. See 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1545(a)(3).

An RFC assessment can account for postural and sit/stand limitations by restricting a claimant to sedentary work.

Ishman v. Kijakazi · filed 2022-08-08(a)(1)

She accounted for Plaintiff’s postural limitations, her sit/stand necessity, and her inability to perform light work by restricting her to sedentary occupations.

Section 404.1545(a) defines residual functional capacity as the most a claimant can still do despite limitations; the assessed limitations must have an explained basis in the evidence.

Kalim v. Saul · filed 2022-08-09(a)

Because the ALJ rejected the medical opinions in the record and provided no explanation of the evidence in the record relied on to support her conclusion that Petitioner was able to perform a reduced range of light work and the bases for the limitations assigned in the RFC, the Court cannot determine how the ALJ arrived at the RFC assessment or find that the ALJ’s disability determination was supported by substantial evidence.

Section 404.1545(a) requires an RFC’s functional abilities to be supported by record evidence showing what the claimant can do in a competitive work setting.

Vanelli v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2022-08-09(a)

I also agree with plaintiff that the changes to the regulations did not remove the requirement that the functional abilities in the RFC be based upon evidence in the record demonstrating the plaintiff’s functional abilities in a competitive work setting.

Section 404.1545(a)(3) requires an ALJ to base residual functional capacity on all relevant medical and other evidence, including credible symptom testimony.

Hoffschneider v. Kijakazi · filed 2022-08-10(a)(3)

The ALJ must also incorporate a claimant’s credible symptom testimony into the RFC determination.

Section 404.1545(a)(3) permits an ALJ to determine residual functional capacity from the record evidence, rather than relying solely on limitations stated in medical opinions.

Garrett v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2022-08-11(a)(3)

Contrary to Plaintiff’s brief argument to the effect (DN 13, p. 5), this inclusion was not a lay person’s assignment of limitations based upon his review of the medical data but rather the ALJ complying with the applicable regulations in crafting an RFC based upon the record.

Section 404.1545(a)(3) requires the ALJ to assess residual functional capacity using all relevant record evidence; medical opinions are only one type of evidence.

Kruse v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2022-08-12(a)(3)

As explained above, RFC is an administrative finding, not a medical one. Thus, opinion evidence is only one type of evidence that an ALJ is required to consider.

An ALJ must base a residual functional capacity determination on all relevant medical evidence in the record.

Hedrick v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2022-08-15(a)

As a general matter, an ALJ must reach an RFC determination based on all the relevant medical evidence in the record. 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1545(a), 404.1546(c). ... Second, contrary to Plaintiff’s claims, the ALJ properly considered, in addition to Dr. Dave’s examination, the overall record evidence and other medical opinions in formulating Plaintiff’s RFC.

Section 404.1545(a) requires an RFC assessment to reflect the claimant’s functional limitations and be supported by the evidence in the record.

Henry v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2022-08-15(a)

And the ALJ took care to explain how he crafted the RFC with reference to Plaintiff’s functional limitations which he described in detail at step three. The ALJ’s RFC determinations are well reasoned and supported by the record as a whole.

Section 404.1545(a)(3) requires the Commissioner to consider all evidence when assessing residual functional capacity, including later medical evidence that may affect a claimant’s functional limitations.

Young v. Saul · filed 2022-08-17(a)(3)

In determining the RFC, the Commissioner must assess all evidence, including the claimant's and others' descriptions of the limitation(s), and medical reports, to determine what capacity the claimant has for work despite his or her impairments. 20 C.F.R. § 404.1545(a)(3) and 416.945(a)(3). ... As it stands, the court finds the ALJ’s RFC assessment is not based on substantial evidence, and this matter should be remanded for consideration of the subsequent medical evidence, and if necessary, a consultative examination to determine the extent of Plaintiff’s functional limitations.

Section 404.1545(a) directs the ALJ to assess residual functional capacity using all relevant record evidence, including medical findings.

Day v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2022-08-19(a)

Thus, the regulations not only allow an ALJ to consider raw medical findings, but even expect the ALJ to do so.

Section 404.1545(a)(3) requires an RFC assessment based on all relevant evidence; medical opinions are only one type of evidence the ALJ considers.

Wolfe v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2022-08-19(a)(3)

Thus, opinion evidence is only one type of evidence that an ALJ is required to consider.

Section 404.1545 requires an ALJ to base residual functional capacity on all relevant medical and other evidence in the record.

Keefer v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2022-08-15(a)(3)

An ALJ bases his RFC determination on “all of the relevant medical and other evidence” in the case record. Id. (a)(3). ... Despite evidence in the record that may support a contrary conclusion, ALJ Zuber thoroughly considered Plaintiff’s medical records and adequately articulated his findings in accordance with the regulations. The Court finds no error.

Section 404.1545 requires the ALJ to consider all medically determinable impairments and relevant evidence when assessing residual functional capacity; limitations must be supported by substantial evidence.

Lanier v. Commissioner Social Security Administration · filed 2022-08-19

In formulating an RFC, the ALJ must consider all medically determinable impairments, including those that are not “severe,” and evaluate “all of the relevant medical and other evidence,” including the claimant’s testimony. ... Nothing in the record supports Plaintiff’s additional suggested limits regarding time away from the workstation. Because Plaintiff’s bathroom limitations were not supported by substantial evidence, the ALJ did not err in construing Plaintiff’s RFC.

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

STITCHICK v. COMMISSIONER OF SOCIAL SECURITY · filed 2022-08-19(a)(1)

A claimant’s RFC “is the most [the claimant] can still do despite [his/her] limitations” and it is “based on all the relevant evidence in [the claimant’s] case record.” 20 C.F.R. § 404.1545(a)(1). ... The Court finds that the ALJ in this matter provided adequate explanation for her rejection of Dr. Toshok’s opinions and supported the RFC finding with evidence that would satisfy a reasonable mind without ignoring contrary evidence.

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

Billiter v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2022-08-22(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). ... Therefore, the ALJ considered the evidence contained in the administrative record when crafting Plaintiff’s RFC, including the pages and statements in Plaintiff’s present arguments, and did not err when deciding not to include a walking or exertion limitation.

Residual functional capacity must be based on all relevant evidence; an ALJ may depart from a medical opinion when the record supports and explains that decision.

Ozment v. Kijakazi · filed 2022-08-23(a)(1)

But in drawing his own inferences, an ALJ must rely on all medical evidence and a fully developed record. The ALJ cannot arbitrarily accept some medical evidence while rejecting other evidence without justification. ... As discussed, the ALJ has provided sufficient support for his findings and explained why he departed from the findings of Dr. Salinas.

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

Hall v. Kijakazi · filed 2022-08-24(a)(3)

Instead, the ALJ considers “all of the relevant medical and other evidence,” including any medical source statements in the record.

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

Liddle v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2022-08-25(a)(3)

Under the Commissioner’s regulations, the ALJ must assess a claimant’s RFC “based on all of the relevant medical and other evidence.” 20 C.F.R. § 404.1545(a)(3). ... In short, the ALJ weighed the evidence available – including both medical opinions – and made an RFC finding that was both supported by substantial evidence, and consistent with the record as a whole.

Section 404.1545(a)(3) requires an RFC assessment based on all relevant medical and other evidence; the assessment need not perfectly match a medical opinion when substantial evidence supports it.

Bradley v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2022-08-25(a)(3)

In short, substantial evidence in the record supports the ALJ’s decision not to include limitations from migraines in Plaintiff’s RFC. Accordingly, the Court finds that although the ALJ’s RFC determination did not perfectly correspond with a medical opinion in the record, the ALJ did not err.

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

Drey v. Commissioner Social Security Administration · filed 2022-08-29

In formulating an RFC, the ALJ must consider all medically determinable impairments, including those that are not “severe,” and evaluate “all of the relevant medical and other evidence,” including the claimant’s testimony. 20 C.F.R. § 404.1545; see also Social Security Ruling (“SSR”) 96-8p, available at 1996 WL 374184. ... Given the ALJ did not err in weighing all the evidence, the ALJ did not err in computing plaintiff’s RFC.

An RFC assessment must be based on all relevant evidence in the case record, including symptoms, objective medical evidence, medical opinions, and medical findings.

Lautz v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2022-08-31(a)(3)

“The RFC assessment must be based on all of the relevant evidence in the case record ....” SSR 96-8p; see 20 C.F.R. § 404.1545(a)(3). The ALJ considered plaintiff’s symptoms, the objective medical evidence, the medical opinions, and the medical findings.

Section 404.1545(a) requires an RFC assessment based on all relevant evidence of a claimant’s remaining ability to work despite impairments.

Wright v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2022-09-06(a)

The RFC finding is an assessment, based upon all of the relevant evidence, of a claimant’s remaining ability to do work despite her impairments. Lewis, 125 F.3d at 1440 (citing 20 C.F.R. § 404.1545(a)). ... Thus, to the extent the ALJ’s RFC assessment is based on this domain, the Court grants Plaintiff’s Motion for Summary Judgment and remands the case with instructions that the ALJ reassess Ms. Wright’s RFC after reassessing the severity of her limitation in interacting with others.

Section 404.1545(a)(3) requires the ALJ to assess residual functional capacity from the record as a whole rather than rely entirely on one physician’s opinion.

Perez v. Saul · filed 2022-09-06(a)(3)

“Great” weight is not controlling weight, and the ALJ is tasked with evaluating the claimant’s RFC based on the record as a whole, rather than relying entirely on a particular physician’s opinion or choose between opinions.

Section 404.1545 requires an RFC assessment to consider all relevant medical and other evidence, including statements from medical sources and observations from the claimant and others.

Barton v. Saul · filed 2022-08-29(a)(3)

Contrary to Plaintiff’s assertion that the ALJ “cherry pick[ed]” evidence from the record, the Court finds that the ALJ properly determined Plaintiff’s RFC by considering “all of the relevant medical and other evidence” as well as “any statements about what [Plaintiff] can still do that have been provided by medical sources” and “descriptions and observations of [Plaintiff’s] limitations” provided by Plaintiff and other non-medical sources.

Section 404.1545 requires an RFC assessment to consider all relevant evidence and the claimant’s ability to meet the physical, mental, sensory, and other requirements of work.

Golden v. Commissioner of the Social Security Administration · filed 2022-08-31(a)(3) and (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.

Section 404.1545 requires an ALJ assessing residual functional capacity to consider all relevant medical and other evidence and all medically determinable impairments, including those that are not severe.

Stanley v. Kijakazi · filed 2022-09-06(a)(2), (a)(3)

In determining a claimant’s RFC at step four of the sequential analysis, an ALJ must consider “all of the relevant medical and other evidence” in the record, 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1545(a)(3), 404.1546(c), and must consider all of the claimant’s “medically determinable impairments,” including those that are not severe.

An ALJ assesses residual functional capacity from all relevant medical and other evidence and need not fully endorse any one medical source.

Hughes, Amanda v. Saul, Andrew · filed 2022-09-08(a)(3)

However, there is no rule that an ALJ must fully endorse any of the medical sources in the record. Under the regulations applicable to Hughes’s claim, an ALJ will make an RFC assessment “based on all of the relevant medical and other evidence.” 20 C.F.R. § 404.1545(a)(3).

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

Addison v. Commissioner of the Social Security Administration · filed 2022-09-08(a)(3)

The regulations require an ALJ to assess a claimant’s RFC “based on all of the relevant medical and other evidence.” 20 C.F.R. § 404.1545(a)(3). ... The ALJ properly assessed Plaintiff’s medical records in determining the severity of Plaintiff’s impairments and developing the RFC.

Section 404.1545(a)(3) requires an ALJ to consider a claimant’s subjective complaints when assessing residual functional capacity.

Bullard v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2022-09-09(a)(3)

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), 416.945(a)(3).

Section 404.1545 defines residual functional capacity as the most a claimant can still do despite limitations and requires the ALJ to consider medical and other evidence when assessing it.

(SS) Ervin v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2022-09-12(a)

The regulations define the residual functional capacity (“RFC”) as “the most you can still do despite your limitations.” 20 C.F.R. § 404.1545(a). In determining plaintiff’s RFC, an ALJ is to consider the objective medical evidence and other evidence. ... Reading the decision as a whole, the court reads it as one where the ALJ relied on the medical evidence in the record and, for plaintiff’s mental conditions, Dr. Torrez’s opinion, in formulating the RFC.

An RFC assessment must be based on all relevant medical and other evidence.

Everett v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2022-09-13(a)(3)

In short, ALJ Sanders appropriately considered all of the evidence of record and rendered a physical RFC assessment, which was supported by substantial evidence, including Plaintiff’s complaints, medical records, and state medical opinions. See 20 C.F.R. § 404.1545(a)(3) (stating that RFC assessments should be “based on all of the relevant medical and other evidence”).

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

Maese v. Kijakazi · filed 2022-09-15(a)(3)

In determining a claimant’s RFC, the ALJ must consider all relevant evidence in the record, including both medical evidence and opinions. See Robbins v. Soc. Sec. Admin., 466 F.3d 880, 883 (9th Cir. 2006); 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1545(a)(3).

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

Oliveira v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2022-09-19(a)(3)

In determining a claimant’s RFC, the ALJ must consider all relevant evidence, including the opinions of medical and non- medical sources. 20 C.F.R. § 404.1545(a)(3).

Section 404.1545 requires an RFC assessment to consider all relevant evidence, including state agency physicians’ opinions.

Lentz v. Kijakazi · filed 2022-09-20

The ALJ’s consideration of the State agency physicians’ opinions was not itself an error because the ALJ must consider all relevant evidence.

Section 404.1545(a)(3) requires an ALJ to base a claimant’s residual functional capacity on all relevant medical and other evidence, including evidence that conflicts with the proposed limitations.

Caponigro v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2022-09-22(a)(3)

In establishing an RFC, an ALJ is directed to base the RFC on “all relevant medical and other evidence.” 20 CFR § 404.1545(a)(3). ... For the reasons stated above, this Court concludes that the ALJ’s RFC analysis was not supported by substantial evidence because it failed to build a logical bridge between the evidence and the ALJ’s conclusion and failed to address evidence that contradicted the ALJ’s conclusion.

Section 404.1545(a)(3) permits an ALJ to weigh medical and nonmedical evidence when determining residual functional capacity.

Enright v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2022-09-19(a)(3)

But “the ALJ is charged with the responsibility of evaluating the medical evidence” when determining a claimant’s RFC. Webb v. Comm'r of Soc. Sec., 368 F.3d 629, 633 (6th Cir. 2004); see, e.g., 20 C.F.R. § 404.1545(a)(3). “An ALJ does not improperly assume the role of a medical expert by weighing the medical and non-medical evidence before rendering an RFC finding.” Coldiron v. Comm'r of Soc. Sec., 391 F. App’x. 435, 439 (6th Cir. 2010). Therefore, this argument is also not well-taken.

An RFC assessment need not include manipulative limitations when substantial evidence supports their omission.

Kerr v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2022-09-20(a)(1)

Substantial evidence supports the ALJ’s RFC. The ALJ did not err by failing to include additional manipulative limitations in the RFC.

Section 404.1545(a)(1) requires the ALJ to consider all relevant evidence when determining the most a claimant can still do despite physical and mental limitations.

Salazar v. Social Security Administration · filed 2022-09-21(a)(1)

First, the ALJ must consider all of the relevant evidence and determine what is “the most [the claimant] can still do despite [her physical and mental] limitations.” 20 C.F.R. § 404.1545(a)(1).

Section 404.1545(a)(1) requires an ALJ to assess what a claimant can still do despite impairments and symptoms based on all relevant evidence.

Wilson v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2022-09-21(a)(1)

The ALJ is charged with the final responsibility for assessing a claimant’s RFC and must base it on all relevant evidence in the record. 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1527(d)(2), 404.1545(a)(1). ... Despite finding the opinions of Dr. Edwards and Dr. Zeune to be only “mostly persuasive,” the ALJ adequately accounted for their limitations in Plaintiff’s RFC.

Section 404.1545(a)(3) treats a claimant’s subjective complaints as one of several factors an ALJ considers when assessing residual functional capacity.

Hurrelbrink v. Social Security Administration, Commissioner of · filed 2022-09-22(a)(3)

A claimant’s subjective complaints are but one of many factors an ALJ is to consider when making the RFC finding.

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

Perez v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2022-09-23(a)(3)

In determining a claimant’s RFC, the ALJ must consider all relevant evidence, including the opinions of medical and non-medical sources.

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

Ohneck v. Social Security Administration, Commissioner · filed 2022-09-26(a)(3)

An ALJ must examine 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” of limitations by the claimant, her family, her neighbors, her friends, or others, including limitations resulting from pain. 20 C.F.R. § 404.1545(a)(3).

Section 404.1545 requires an RFC assessment based on the record as a whole, including medical evidence and the claimant’s reported symptoms and limitations.

Davis v. Kijakazi · filed 2022-09-26

Although the ALJ concluded the objective findings fail to support Plaintiff’s allegations of disabling symptoms and limitations, the ALJ acknowledged that does not mean no limitation is warranted and properly determined the RFC based on the record as a whole.

An RFC assessment must consider all relevant medical and other evidence, including evidence that supports an opinion the ALJ discounts.

Dockery v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2022-09-26(a)(3)

In formulating the RFC, the ALJ may not just pick and choose from the evidence but must consider it in its entirety. ... The absence of this evidence from the ALJ’s analysis creates an incomplete explanation of how the ALJ weighed Bevis’ medical opinion.

An ALJ must base a claimant’s residual functional capacity on all relevant evidence in the record.

Jordan v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2022-09-26(a)(1)

The ALJ is charged with the final responsibility for assessing a claimant’s RFC and must base it on all relevant evidence in the record. 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1527(d)(2), 404.1545(a)(1).

Section 404.1545(a)(3) requires an RFC assessment to consider all relevant medical and other evidence, including evidence contrary to the ALJ’s finding.

Castro v. Saul · filed 2022-09-28(a)(3)

While the ALJ was not required to incorporate Susana’s testing results into the RFC, she could not gloss over or ignore an entire line of evidence that ran contrary to her finding. See 20 C.F.R. § 404.1545(a)(3) (indicating that the RFC determination is “based on all of the relevant medical and other evidence”).

An RFC determination must consider all relevant medical and other evidence, including lay statements, though the ALJ need not explain how nonmedical evidence was weighed.

MARTINEZ v. COMMISSIONER OF SOCIAL SECURITY · filed 2022-09-28(a)(3)

An ALJ’s RFC determination must be based on “all of the relevant medical and other evidence.” ... The ALJ, then, is not required to articulate an analysis of how he or she weighed nonmedical evidence, but cannot simply ignore relevant evidence, either.

Section 404.1545(a)(1) requires an RFC assessment to account for all relevant evidence about what a claimant can still do despite limitations.

Dunn v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2022-09-28(a)(1)

The ALJ must base the RFC assessment on all relevant evidence in the record. 20 C.F.R. § 404.1545(a)(1). ... Because the record contains relevant evidence that a reasonable mind might accept as adequate to support the ALJ’s conclusion that Plaintiff can frequently finger, handle and reach, the Court concludes that the ALJ’s finding is supported by substantial evidence and must be affirmed.

Section 404.1545(a)(1) requires the ALJ to assess residual functional capacity based on all relevant evidence in the claimant’s record.

Webb v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2022-09-23(a)(1)

Also, 20 C.F.R. § 404.1545 clearly states that an ALJ is to assess a claimant’s RFC “based on all the relevant evidence in [the claimant’s] case record,” and 20 C.F.R. § 404.1546 clearly states that “the administrative law judge . . . is responsible for assessing your residual functional capacity.”

Residual functional capacity measures the most a claimant can do despite the combined effects of credible limitations and is assessed from the record as a whole.

Clifford v. Kijakazi · filed 2022-09-23

A claimant's RFC is the most an individual can do despite the combined effects of all of his or her credible limitations. ... Although the ALJ concluded the objective findings fail to support Plaintiff’s allegations of disabling symptoms and limitations, the ALJ acknowledged that does not mean no limitation is warranted and properly determined the RFC based on the record as a whole.

Section 404.1545 requires the ALJ to consider all medically determinable impairments, including those that are not severe, and their combined limiting effects when assessing residual functional capacity.

Howland v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2022-09-26(a)(2)

In rendering the RFC, therefore, the ALJ must consider the medical opinions in conjunction with all the other evidence of record and will consider all the medically determinable impairments, including impairments that are not severe, and the total limiting effects of each.

Section 404.1545(a)(3) requires an ALJ to base the residual functional capacity assessment on all relevant evidence, including medical opinions and symptoms.

Johnson v. Kijakazi · filed 2022-09-26(a)(3)

An ALJ must base a claimant’s RFC on all relevant evidence in the record, including the claimant’s medical history and findings, the effects of treatment, reports of daily activities, medical opinions, and effects of symptoms. ... The Court agrees that substantial evidence does not support the ALJ’s RFC determination relating to Plaintiff’s ability to interact with others and in incorporating appropriate restrictions in the RFC.

Section 404.1545 requires an RFC assessment to consider all relevant medical and other evidence, including limitations caused by impairments that are not severe.

Brozek v. Social Security Administration, Commissioner of · filed 2022-09-26(a), (e)

The assessment is to be based upon all relevant medical and other evidence in the record and is to include consideration of the limitations caused by all the claimant’s impairments, including impairments which are not “severe” as defined in the regulations. Id. at §§ 404.1545(a & e), 416.945(a & e).

Section 404.1545 requires an ALJ to base a claimant’s residual functional capacity on all relevant evidence in the record.

Potter v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2022-09-26(a)(1)

The ALJ bases his or her determination on all relevant evidence in the case record. 20 C.F.R. § 404.1545(a)(1)-(4). ... Thus, the Court finds that the ALJ’s RFC analysis, including his assessment of the opinion evidence, was supported by substantial evidence.

Section 404.1545(a)(1) requires an RFC assessment based on all relevant evidence; an ALJ may place the RFC between medical opinions when no single opinion accurately captures the claimant’s capacity.

Christopher v. Kijakazi · filed 2022-09-26(a)(1)

Although RFCs must be based at least in part on medical evidence and ALJs cannot simply substitute their lay opinions for expert medical, see Chunn v. Barnhart, 397 F.3d 667, 672 (8th Cir. 2005), it is not erroneous to review multiple medical opinions, conclude that no single opinion correctly captures the claimant’s RFC, and determine the RFC is somewhere between the offered opinions, Pierce, 22 F.4th at 773.

Residual functional capacity measures the most a claimant can do despite limitations and must be assessed before step four.

Bealmear v. Kijakazi · filed 2022-09-26(a)(1)

Prior to Step Four, the Commissioner must assess the claimant’s “residual functional capacity” (RFC), which is “the most a claimant can do despite [his or her] limitations.” Moore v. Astrue, 572 F.3d 520, 523 (8th Cir. 2009) (citing 20 C.F.R. § 404.1545(a)(1)); see also 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520(e). ... Having reviewed the entire record, the Court finds that the AL] made a proper RFC determination based on a fully and fairly developed record.

An RFC assessment must account for evidence of a claimant’s functional limitations; an unexplained finding that the claimant can perform medium work despite those limitations warrants remand.

White v. Kijakazi · filed 2022-09-26(a)(3)

Also, there are UE ROM limitations on a more recent consultive exam, and none of this appears to have been addressed in the RFC. In short, I find that this case should be remanded for explanation of how, with these limitations in the upper extremity, Plaintiff would be able to perform medium work.

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

Davis v. Saul · filed 2022-09-26(a)

RFC is an administrative assessment of the most an individual can do despite the limitations caused by physical and mental impairments. See Lewis, 858 F.3d at 861–62; 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1545(a), 416.945(a). ... Claimant has failed to show error in the ALJ’s RFC assessment.

Section 404.1545(a)(1) requires an RFC assessment based on all relevant record evidence, including evidence bearing on an off-task limitation.

FREEDLINE v. COMMISSIONER OF SOCIAL SECUIRTY · filed 2022-09-26(a)(1)

Prior to resolving the inquiries at steps four and/or five of the evaluation, an ALJ must formulate a claimant’s RFC which represents the most a claimant “can still do despite [his/her] limitations.” 20 C.F.R. § 404.1545(a)(1). The ALJ’s RFC determination must be “based on all the relevant evidence in [the claimant’s] case record.” Id. ... The ALJ having considered all evidence that appears to be relevant to off-task time and having adequately explained his rejection of a more significant off-task-time limitation, the Court finds no error in the ALJ’s determination that Plaintiff failed to present evidence to justify any more than a 9% off-task-time limitation.

A claimant’s subjective complaints are one factor the ALJ considers when assessing residual functional capacity.

Landess v. Social Security Administration, Commissioner of · filed 2022-09-26(a)(3)

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), 416.945(a)(3).

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

Reyes v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2022-09-27(a)(1)

A claimant’s RFC represents “the most [he or she] can still do despite [his or her] limitations.” 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1545(a)(1), 416.945(a)(1). ... As discussed below, the Court finds that the ALJ’s step three analysis was appropriate and that the ALJ’s RFC determination was supported by substantial evidence, but the Court further finds that the ALJ committed legal error at step five.

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

Cummock v. Saul · filed 2022-09-27(a)(1)

RFC is a “determination of the most the claimant can still do despite his physical and mental limitations and is based on all relevant evidence in the claimant’s record.” Perez v. Barnhart, 415 F.3d 457, 462 (5th Cir. 2005) (citing 20 C.F.R. § 404.1545(a)(1)).

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

Mickles v. Saul · filed 2022-09-27(a)

A claimant’s residual functional capacity refers to the most the claimant can still do despite his limitations. See 20 C.F.R. § 404.1545(a).

Residual functional capacity is based on all relevant evidence and need not mirror any particular medical opinion.

(SS) Venedicto v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2022-09-28(a)(3)

The RFC need not mirror any particular opinion, it is an assessment formulated by the ALJ based on all relevant evidence. See 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1545(a)(3).

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

Vozzella v. Saul · filed 2022-09-28(a)(1), (a)(3)

Plaintiff’s RFC is “the most [he] can still do despite [his] limitations” and is determined “based on all the relevant evidence in [the] case record,” namely, “all of the relevant medical and other evidence.” 20 C.F.R. § 404.1545(a)(1), (3) (2022). ... Contrary to Plaintiff’s contention, the ALJ did consider objective medical evidence in making her RFC finding. As the RFC finding is supported by substantial evidence, I cannot remand on Plaintiff’s step four argument.

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

Kolkowski v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2022-09-28(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).

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

Stone v. Kijakazi · filed 2022-09-28(a)

The RFC assessment represents the most a claimant can do despite any physical and mental limitations. ... The ALJ’s assessment of Plaintiff’s RFC is supported by substantial evidence in this case.

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

Hendrix v. Kijakazi · filed 2022-09-28(a)(1)

One’s RFC is the “most you can still do despite your limitations.” 20 C.F.R. § 404.1545(a)(1).

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

McCoy v. Kijakazi · filed 2022-09-28(a)(1)

One’s RFC is the “most you can still do despite your limitations.” 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1545(a)(1), 416.945(a)(1).

An ALJ assesses residual functional capacity from the record as a whole and need not copy every limitation in a persuasive medical opinion or separately explain each omission.

MATHEWS v. KIJAKAZI · filed 2022-09-28(a)(3)

In articulating a concise RFC determination that reflects thorough consideration of the entire record, an ALJ will necessarily arrive at an RFC that is supported by the evidence but not necessarily identical to any one record or opinion. There is no corollary requirement that an ALJ explicitly reject any part of a persuasive/very-persuasive opinion that does not make it into the RFC verbatim and provide an explanation for having purportedly rejected such evidence.

Section 404.1545(a)(3) requires an ALJ assessing residual functional capacity to consider information in medical records beyond formal medical opinions.

Rudden v. Kijakazi · filed 2022-09-29(a)(3)

An ALJ is not only permitted but required to consider the information contained in medical records, beyond the medical opinions themselves, when crafting a claimant’s RFC.

An RFC assessment considers all relevant medical and other evidence when determining how a claimant’s impairments limit work.

Arnell v. Saul · filed 2022-09-29(a)(3)

Determining a claimant’s RFC is an administrative finding reserved to the Commissioner that is based on “all of the relevant medical and other evidence.” 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1527(d), 404.1545(a)(3), 404.1513(a)(2). ... Accordingly, the Court finds that the ALJ’s assessment of Petitioner’s mental limitations in the RFC is supported by substantial evidence and free of harmful error.

Section 404.1545(a) requires the ALJ to consider all relevant evidence of a claimant’s impairments and related symptoms when assessing residual functional capacity.

Jenkins v. Kijakazi · filed 2022-09-29(a)

In assessing RFC, the ALJ must consider all relevant evidence of the claimant’s impairments and any related symptoms.

Section 404.1545(a) defines residual functional capacity as what a claimant can still do despite physical or mental limitations; the assessment considers the claimant’s symptoms and relevant evidence.

Turner v. Saul · filed 2022-09-29(a)

A claimant’s RFC is defined as “what [the claimant] can still do” despite her “physical or mental limitations.” 20 C.F.R. § 404.1545(a). ... As to Plaintiff’s remaining arguments, a review of the ALJ’s decision demonstrates that the ALJ properly formulated Plaintiff’s RFC only after evaluating Plaintiff’s subjective symptoms and extensively discussing the relevant evidence, including Plaintiff’s testimony and the medical evidence.

An RFC assessment considers medical and nonmedical evidence in the record.

Brown v. Kijakazi · filed 2022-09-29(a)(3)

When read in context, as part of the overall discussion of Plaintiff’s RFC, the Court finds the ALJ appropriately considered the medical and nonmedical evidence in the record.

Section 404.1545 requires an RFC assessment of what a claimant can do despite physical and mental limitations; the assessment need not rely on a specific medical opinion if other evidence supports it.

Anders v. Kijakazi · filed 2022-09-29

The RFC is what a claimant can do despite his or her limitations and includes an assessment of physical abilities and mental impairments. 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1545, 416.945. ... As an initial matter, the Court notes that remand is not necessary merely because the ALJ did not find any of the medical opinions fully persuasive.

Section 404.1545(a)(1) requires the ALJ to assess residual functional capacity using all relevant evidence; the claimant need not identify a medical opinion supporting specific limitations.

Flory v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2022-09-29(a)(1)

The ALJ must base the RFC assessment on all relevant evidence in the record. 20 C.F.R. § 404.1545(a)(1). ... There is no requirement that a claimant must point to a medical opinion that supports specific limitations, or otherwise identify those limitations. Instead, it is the ALJ who is charged with the responsibility of assessing a claimant’s RFC based on the evidence as a whole.

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

Tourgeman v. Saul · filed 2022-09-30(a)(1)-(2)

The ALJ reaches an RFC determination by reviewing and considering all of the relevant evidence, including non-severe impairments. 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1545(a)(1)-(2), 416.945(a)(1)-(2); see Social Security Ruling (“SSR”) 96-8p (“In assessing RFC, the adjudicator must consider limitations and restrictions imposed by all of an individual’s impairments, even those that are not ‘severe.’”).

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

Alcantara v. Kijakazi · filed 2022-09-30

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) requires an RFC assessment to consider all relevant medical and other evidence in the record.

Talton v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2022-09-30(a)(3)

An RFC must be based on all of the relevant medical and other evidence contained in the record.

An ALJ must base the residual functional capacity assessment on all relevant evidence in the record.

Pattson v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2022-09-30(a)(1)

The ALJ must base the RFC assessment on all relevant evidence in the record. 20 C.F.R. § 404.1545(a)(1).

An ALJ determines residual functional capacity by considering all relevant evidence, including evidence concerning the claimant’s functional limitations.

Van Zornek v. Commissioner of Social Security Administration · filed 2022-09-30(a)(1)-(2)

As discussed above, the ALJ reaches an RFC determination by reviewing and considering all of the relevant evidence. 20 C.F.R. § 404.1545(a)(1)-(2). ... The evidence concerning the shoulder impairments reasonably supported no greater limitations than the ALJ assessed.

An ALJ considers medical opinions in the record when determining a claimant’s residual functional capacity.

Cooper v. Social Security Administration · filed 2022-10-04(a)(3)

An ALJ considers medical opinions in the record as part of determining a claimant’s RFC. 20 C.F.R. § 404.1545(a)(3).

Section 404.1545(a) permits an RFC assessment based on all record evidence without requiring each limitation to rest on a specific medical opinion.

Kroenke v. Social Security Administration, Commissioner of · filed 2022-10-13(a)

There is no need in this case, or in any other, for the Commissioner to base the limitations in her RFC assessment upon specific statements in medical evidence or medical opinions in the record.

Section 404.1545(a) requires an ALJ assessing residual functional capacity to consider all relevant medical and other evidence, including medical sources’ statements about what the claimant can still do.

McTyere v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2022-10-17(a)

In assessing a claimant’s RFC, the ALJ is tasked to consider all relevant medical and other evidence, including any statements about what Plaintiff can still do provided by any medical sources. See 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1545(a), 404.1527(d)(2), 404.1546(c).

An ALJ assessing residual functional capacity must consider relevant evidence, including a prior ALJ’s RFC finding for a closely related period.

MARTIN v. KIJAKAZI · filed 2022-10-20(a)

The Court has considered these arguments, but ultimately finds that the ALJ’s failure to acknowledge ALJ Frye’s RFC finding amounted to a failure to consider all the relevant evidence in Plaintiff’s record.

Section 404.1545(a)(3) requires an ALJ to assess residual functional capacity using relevant medical and non-medical evidence, including medical-source statements about what a claimant can still do.

Richardson v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2022-10-21(a)(3)

The ALJ is responsible for assessing plaintiff’s RFC based on a review of relevant medical and non-medical evidence, including any statement about what plaintiff can still do, provided by any medical sources. Id. §§ 404.1527(d), 404.1545(a)(3), 404.1546(c).

An RFC must be based on all relevant medical and other evidence in the claimant’s record.

ALLEY v. KIJAKAZI · filed 2022-10-24(a)(3)

It must be based on “all of the relevant medical and other evidence” in the claimant’s record. Id. § 404.1545(a)(3). ... Here, the ALJ thoroughly reviewed the evidence in the record and explained why she found Plaintiff maintained the work capacity articulated in the RFC despite, inter alia, her alleged panic attacks, migraines, and manic episodes.

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

Crowell v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2022-10-25(a)(3)

ALJs are responsible for assessing a claimant’s RFC “based on all of the relevant medical evidence and other evidence.” 20 C.F.R. §404.1545(a)(3), 404.1546(c); ... The key question is whether the ALJ ignored evidence that would have reshaped the RFC analysis. Here, there is nothing to suggest that any of the cited evidence or incidents require a more restrictive RFC than the ALJ already provided.

Section 404.1545(a)(3) requires an ALJ assessing residual functional capacity to consider all relevant evidence, including non-medical evidence.

Miller v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2022-11-04(a)(3)

Granted, this evidence is from Plaintiff’s ex-wife and not from a medical source, but in evaluating a claimant’s RFC, an ALJ is expected to take into consideration all of the relevant evidence, including both medical and non-medical evidence. See 20 C.F.R. § 404.1545(a)(3).

Section 404.1545(a)(1) requires an ALJ to consider relevant evidence when assessing residual functional capacity, but does not require the ALJ to state a specific weight for the objective medical evidence considered.

DRINKALL v. COMMISSIONER OF SOCIAL SECURITY · filed 2022-11-03(a)(1)

The ALJ was required to consider all this relevant evidence toward the RFC, 20 C.F.R. § 404.1545(a)(1), but she was not required to articulate its specific weight in her analysis.

An ALJ assesses residual functional capacity from all relevant evidence of what a claimant can do despite physical and mental limitations.

Phelps v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2022-11-08(a)(1)

To determine a claimant’s RFC, an ALJ makes an assessment based on all the relevant evidence of record as to what a claimant can do in a work setting despite any physical or mental limitations caused by the claimant’s impairments and related symptoms. 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1545(a)(1), 416.945(a)(1).

Section 404.1545 requires the Commissioner to assess residual functional capacity using all relevant evidence, including medical records, physician observations, and the claimant’s description of symptoms.

Ivy v. Kijakazi · filed 2022-11-17(a)(3)

The Commissioner makes the final RFC determination based on all the relevant evidence, including medical records, observations of physicians, and the plaintiff’s own description of the severity of symptoms. ... In light of this, the ALJ’s interpretation of the evidence is a reasonable one and, as such, provides substantial evidence to affirm the RFC.

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

Jackson v. Kijakazi · filed 2022-11-23

In rendering a 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. 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1545, 416.945.

An RFC assessment considers all relevant evidence, including a claimant’s credible allegations of pain.

Rivera v. Commissioner, SSA · filed 2022-11-30(a)(3)

The RFC assessment is based on all the relevant evidence, including a claimant’s credible allegations of pain.

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

Roberts v. Kijakazi · filed 2022-12-02(a)(3)

The ALJ is required to formulate the claimant’s RFC based on “all of the relevant medical and other evidence.” 20 C.F.R. § 404.1545(a)(3). ... The Court agrees with Roberts that the ALJ’s reasons for rejecting the medical opinions of Ms. Dryer and Ms. Hummel (and certain portions of Dr. King’s opinion) at step four— whether assessed individually or taken together—amount to reversable error.

Section 404.1545(a) directs the ALJ to assess residual functional capacity from the record as a whole without requiring a supporting medical opinion.

Baines v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2022-12-07(a)

Furthermore, nothing in the relevant regulations requires a supportive medical opinion. As noted above, the regulations pertaining to RFC state that an ALJ, not a medical source, assesses RFC based on the record at large. 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.

Shaw v. Kijakazi · filed 2022-12-12(a)(3)

ALJs are responsible for assessing a claimant’s RFC “based on all of the relevant medical evidence and other evidence.” 20 C.F.R. §404.1545(a)(3), 404.1546(c); see Fanta v. Saul, 848 F. App’x 655, 658 (7th Cir. 2021) (emphasizing that an ALJ has the final responsibility for determining a claimant’s RFC and is not required to adopt any doctor’s particular opinion.)

Residual functional capacity is based on all relevant evidence and need not mirror any particular medical opinion.

(SS) Hernandez v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2022-11-10(a)(3)

The RFC need not mirror any particular opinion; it is an assessment formulated by the ALJ based on all relevant evidence. See 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1545(a)(3).

Section 404.1545 calls for an RFC determination based on the entire record, supported by some medical evidence.

Lee v. Social Security Administration · filed 2022-11-15

While the finding must include some medical evidence, the RFC determination is based upon the entirety of the record. See 20 C.F.R. § 404.1545.

Residual functional capacity measures the most a claimant can do despite limitations from her impairments, based on all relevant evidence.

Brown Clark v. Social Security · filed 2022-11-16(a)(1)

A claimant’s RFC is the most work she can do despite any limitations caused by her impairments. 20 C.F.R. § 404.1545(a)(1). ... Here, the ALJ did not “play doctor,” but rather considered all the evidence of record, including the medical opinions from Drs. Rogzinski and Salahi, in formulating the RFC. In doing so, the ALJ applied the correct legal standards, and the ALJ’s decision is supported by substantial evidence.