20 C.F.R. § 404.1545

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

Hernandez v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2020-08-26(a)

An RFC assesses the most a claimant can still do despite his limitations.

Section 404.1545(a)(3) requires residual functional capacity to be determined from all relevant medical and other evidence.

(SS) Carreon v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2020-08-27(a)(3)

“In determining a claimant's [residual functional capacity], an ALJ must consider all relevant evidence in the record such as 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. See also 20 C.F.R. § 404.1545(a)(3) (residual functional capacity determined based on all relevant medical and other evidence).

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

Theroux v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2020-08-27(a)(1)

A claimant’s RFC is an assessment of “the most [he] can still do despite [his] limitations.” 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1545(a)(1), 416.945(a)(1).

Residual functional capacity must reflect the claimant’s own limitations; reliance on another person’s medical records can leave the assessment unsupported.

JONES v. COMMISSIONER OF SOCIAL SECURITY · filed 2020-08-28(a)(1)

Here, in considering the subjective complaints and determining the RFC of a 50 year old claimant, the ALJ expressly relied on the records relating to a teenager and which reflected an ability to play basketball and corrective hand surgery. R. 38–39. In light of this mistake, the Court cannot, based on the present record, conclude that substantial evidence supports the ALJ’s determination.

Section 404.1545 requires an ALJ to consider mild limitations from nonsevere impairments when assessing residual functional capacity.

Mendoza v. Commissioner Social Security Administration · filed 2020-08-28(a)(2)

Like Hutton, it was an error for the ALJ to not address Plaintiff’s limitations in understanding, remembering, or applying information and her limitations in concentrating, persisting, or maintaining pace, after the ALJ made the finding that Plaintiff had mild limitations in these areas.

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

Bates v. Commissioner of Social Security Administration · filed 2020-08-31(a)(3)

In assessing a claimant’s RFC, the ALJ must consider “all of the relevant medical and other evidence,” including medical opinion evidence. ... Social security regulations require that an ALJ consider a claimant’s statements about her symptoms when determining the claimant’s RFC.

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

Gavin, Jr. v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2020-08-31(a)(1)

A claimant’s RFC is “the most [he] can still do despite [his] limitations.” 20 C.F.R. § 404.1545(a)(1).

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

Martin v. Commissioner of the Social Security Administration · filed 2020-08-31(a)(1)-(2)

In assessing the claimant’s RFC, the Commissioner considers “all the relevant evidence in [the] case record,” 20 C.F.R. § 404.1545(a)(1), and “all of the claimant’s medically determinable impairments,” id. § 404.1545(a)(2).

Section 404.1545(a)(1) defines residual functional capacity as the most a claimant can still do despite impairments and related symptoms.

McCollum v. Commissioner, Social Security Administration · filed 2020-08-31(a)(1)

By definition, a claimant’s RFC is the most the claimant can still do despite the claimant’s impairments and any related symptoms. 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1545(a)(1), 416.945(a)(1) (2020).

In assessing residual functional capacity, the ALJ considers all relevant medical and other evidence, including medical opinions.

Moulis v. Commissioner of Social Security Administration · filed 2020-09-08(a)(3)

In assessing a claimant’s RFC, the ALJ considers “all of the relevant medical and other evidence,” including medical opinion evidence.

Section 404.1545 defines residual functional capacity as the most a claimant can do despite the combined effects of credible limitations.

Perfetto v. Saul · filed 2020-09-09

A claimant's RFC is the most an individual can do despite the combined effects of his credible limitations. See 20 C.F.R. § 404.1545.

Section 404.1545(a)(3) makes the claimant responsible for providing evidence used to assess residual functional capacity.

Skibniewski v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2020-09-10(a)(3)

It is the plaintiff’s burden to produce evidence and prove both his RFC and his disability. See 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1545(a)(3), 416.945(a)(3) (claimant is “responsible for providing the evidence [the ALJ] will use to make a finding about [his] residual functional capacity”).

An ALJ satisfies the residual functional capacity requirement for mental limitations by performing the Paragraph B analysis and stating that its degree of limitation is incorporated into the assessment.

(SS) Kaminski v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2020-09-14(a)

When an ALJ performs the Paragraph B analysis and indicates the “degree of limitation” is incorporated into the RFC, this is sufficient to meet the burden imposed by the Regulations.

Section 404.1545(a)(3) requires the ALJ to assess residual functional capacity from the record as a whole, rather than medical opinions alone.

Catlin v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2020-09-14(a)(3)

Second, the ALJ is obligated to formulate Plaintiff’s RFC based on the record as a whole, not just upon the medical opinions alone.

An ALJ need not include an alleged limitation in the residual functional capacity assessment when the claimed severity lacks objective support.

Hyder v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2020-09-14

Hyder contends that the ALJ’s failure to include limitations based on these “severe impairments” was error. However, the ALJ did not include limitations based on these alleged impairments because Hyder’s testimony about the severity of her impairments was not supported by objective evidence.

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

Jordan v. Commissioner of Social Security Administration · filed 2020-09-15(a)(1)

The RFC is an assessment of a claimant’s ability to do work despite his impairments. Walton v. Astrue, 773 F. Supp. 2d 742, 747 (N.D. Ohio 2011) (citing 20 C.F.R. § 404.1545(a)(1) and SSR 96-8p, 1996 SSR LEXIS 5 (July 2, 1996)). ... Notwithstanding the ALJ’s failure to apply proper legal standards in evaluating Dr. Rhiew’s opinion, the ALJ applied proper legal standards and reached a conclusion supported by substantial evidence in declining to incorporate into the RFC limitations based on Jordan’s left shoulder impairment.

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

Wendy M. v. Saul · filed 2020-09-16(a)(3)

The ALJ must assess a claimant’s RFC “based on all the relevant medical evidence and other evidence.” Id. §§ 404.1545(a)(3), 416.945(a)(3).

Residual functional capacity must account for all of a claimant’s impairments and be based on all relevant medical and other evidence.

Dolin v. Commissioner of Social Security Administration · filed 2020-09-16(a)

All a claimant’s impairments are to be considered in the inquiry, and the RFC is to be based on all relevant medical and other evidence. 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1545(a), 416.945(a).

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.

Smith v. Saul · filed 2020-09-17(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. 20 C.F.R. § 404.1545(a)(3); see also S.S.R. 96-8p, 1996 WL 374184, at *5. ... Substantial evidence supports the ALJ’s conclusions and he has offered sufficient explanation for formulating an RFC less restrictive than Claimant’s testimony.

Section 404.1545(a) defines residual functional capacity as the most a claimant can still do despite limitations; an ALJ may not determine that capacity by independently interpreting clinical findings.

(SS) Guzman v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2020-09-18(a)

A claimant’s residual functional capacity is “the most [a claimant] can still do despite [her] limitations.” 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1545(a), 416.945(a); see also 20 C.F.R. Part 404, Subpart P, Appendix 2, § 200.00(c) (defining an RFC as the “maximum degree to which the individual retains the capacity for sustained performance of the physical-mental requirements of jobs”). ... Because no physician reviewed the MRI results or the clinical findings from the examinations after 2015, the ALJ clearly rendered her own medical findings that Plaintiff could perform light work. It is well-settled law that an ALJ may not render her own medical opinion and is not empowered to independently assess clinical findings.

An ALJ assesses residual functional capacity by considering all relevant medical and other evidence to determine what a claimant can do despite his limitations.

Rhinehart v. Commissioner Social Security Administration · filed 2020-09-18(a)

RFC represents the most a claimant can do despite his limitations, and it is the ALJ’s responsibility to make an RFC assessment by considering all of the relevant medical and other evidence in the record.

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

Hammer v. Commissioner, Social Security of (TV1) · filed 2020-09-18(a)(1)

An RFC is the most a claimant can do despite his limitations. 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1545(a)(1) and 416.945(a)(1).

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

Karahodzic v. Berryhill · filed 2020-09-21(a)(1)

A claimant’s RFC is “the most a claimant can do despite his limitations.” Moore, 572 F.3d at 523 (citing 20 C.F.R. § 404.1545(a)(1)).

Section 404.1545 requires the ALJ to assess a claimant’s exertional and nonexertional capacity when determining residual functional capacity.

Lindsey v. Saul · filed 2020-09-21

To properly ascertain a plaintiff's RFC, the ALJ must assess the plaintiff's exertional and nonexertional capacity.

Section 404.1545 requires residual functional capacity to be assessed using all relevant evidence in the case record.

Bielawski, Jr. v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2020-09-21

Ultimately, the ALJ considered the medical opinions along with other evidence including medical records, objective testing and Plaintiff’s own testimony, in assessing the Physical RFC. This approach is consistent with Social Security regulations that state, “[w]e will assess your residual functional capacity based on all the relevant evidence in your case record.” 20 C.F.R. § 404.1545.

Section 404.1545(a)(3) requires an ALJ assessing residual functional capacity to consider all relevant evidence, including medical records, lay evidence, and the effects of symptoms attributable to a medically determinable impairment.

Everson v. Commissioner Social Security Administration · filed 2020-09-21(a)(3)

In determining a claimant’s residual functioning capacity, 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), 416.945(a)(3) (2019); Smolen v. Chater, 80 F.3d 1273, 1281 (9th Cir.1996).

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

Studebaker v. Commissioner Social Security Administration · filed 2020-09-21(a)(1)

The “residual functional capacity is the most [a claimant] can still do despite [his] limitations,” 20 C.F.R. § 404.1545(a)(1). ... Judge Weatherly’s residual functional capacity finding and hypothetical included limitations for which there was support in the record and, consequently, were proper.

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

Hutchinson v. Saul · filed 2020-10-19(a)(2)

Also, Dr. Bhavsar’s opinion could have impacted the residual functional capacity at step four, where an ALJ must include “all of [a claimant’s] medically determinable impairments,” whether severe or not. 20 C.F.R. § 404.1545(a)(2).

An ALJ may assess residual functional capacity using medical opinions together with later medical evidence and the claimant’s testimony.

Clark v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2020-10-19(a)(3)

An ALJ makes this finding based on a consideration of medical opinions and all other evidence in the case record. ... The above analysis confirms that the ALJ substantially relied on the medical opinion of Dr. Dawson, as well as subsequently received medical and testamentary evidence, in making the physical RFC finding.

Section 404.1545 requires the ALJ to consider all relevant evidence when assessing residual functional capacity, including testimony and limitations that are not severe.

Franks v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2020-10-23

In making a proper RFC determination, the ALJ must consider all of the relevant evidence in the record, including testimony by the claimant, as well as evidence regarding limitations that are not severe.

A mental residual functional capacity finding may be supported by examination findings, response to treatment, and evidence of medication compliance.

ARSLANIAN v. SOCIAL SECURITY ADMINISTRATION · filed 2020-10-26

Instead, evidence of his normal mental status examinations, improvement with medication, and declines associated with substance abuse, and psychiatric medication noncompliance supports the ALJ’s determination that Mr. Arslanin retained the mental capacity to perform simple, repetitive work, in a low stress, low production job, with only occasional contacts with others. ... Therefore, the ALJ’s RFC determination was supported by substantial evidence in the record.

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

Jordan v. Saul · filed 2020-10-26(a)(1)

A claimant’s RFC “is the most [he] can still do despite [his] limitations.” 20 C.F.R. § 404.1545(a)(1). ... The ALJ properly evaluated the record in creating the RFC and provided a logical bridge between his findings and the record in making his determination.

In assessing residual functional capacity, the ALJ evaluates all relevant medical and other evidence and weighs physicians’ opinions.

Sanders v. Saul · filed 2020-10-26(a)(3)

In formulating an RFC assessment, “the ALJ evaluates all relevant medical and other evidence and considers what weight to assign to treating, consultative, and examining physicians’ opinions.” Eslinger v. Comm’r of Soc. Sec., 476 F. App’x 618, 621 (6th Cir. 2012) (citing 20 C.F.R. § 404.1545(a)(3)); see also Ealy v. Comm’r of Soc. Sec., 594 F.3d 504, 514 (6th Cir. 2010).

Section 404.1545 defines residual functional capacity as the most a claimant can do despite the combined effects of credible limitations.

Shields v. Saul · filed 2020-10-28

A claimant's RFC is the most an individual can do despite the combined effects of all of his or her credible limitations. See 20 C.F.R. § 404.1545.

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

Kolodziej v. Saul · filed 2020-10-29(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). ... The ALJ properly considered the medical evidence in formulating Plaintiff’s RFC.

An ALJ may account for limitations in concentration, persistence, or pace by restricting a claimant to simple, routine tasks when the decision explains why the record supports that restriction.

Strauch v. Saul · filed 2020-10-29(a)(1)

The ALJ discussed Plaintiff’s mental limitations and sufficiently explained why the record supported only a limitation of “simple, routine tasks.” Accordingly, the ALJ did not fail to account for Plaintiff’s limitations regarding concentration, persistence, or pace, and Plaintiff’s assignment of error as to this point is overruled.

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

Sims v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2020-10-30(a)(1)

The RFC is an assessment of a claimant’s ability to do work despite his impairments. Walton v. Astrue, 773 F. Supp. 2d 742, 747 (N.D. Ohio 2011) (citing 20 C.F.R. § 404.1545(a)(1) and SSR 96-8p, 1996 SSR LEXIS 5 (July 2, 1996)). ... The ALJ applied proper legal standards in evaluating Sims’s RFC and the effects of his obesity.

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

Vickers v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2020-11-02(a)(3)

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

Section 404.1545 requires an RFC assessment to account for the functional limitations and environmental restrictions imposed by all medically determinable impairments, including obesity.

Campbell v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2020-11-03

RFC is a medical assessment of what an individual can do in a work setting despite the functional limitations and environmental restrictions imposed by all of his medically determinable impairments. 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1545 and 416.945. ... Based on this record, the ALJ considered plaintiff’s obesity in determining the RFC. Accordingly, plaintiff’s claim of error is denied.

A claimant’s residual functional capacity is the most the claimant can do despite limitations; the assessment must be supported by the record as a whole.

Corbett v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2020-11-03(a)(1)

A claimant’s RFC is the most he can do despite his limitations. 20 C.F.R. § 404.1545(a)(1). ... In light of the ALJ’s detailed analysis of Plaintiff’s medical history, the relevant medical opinions, Plaintiff’s testimony, and his activities of daily living, this Court concludes the RFC determination was supported by substantial evidence, as summarized below.

Section 404.1545(a) requires an RFC assessment based on the claimant’s limitations and the relevant evidence; a light-work assessment stands when substantial evidence supports it.

Phillips v. Saul · filed 2020-12-01(a)

Because the ALJ built a logical bridge from the medical and other evidence to her conclusions in the RFC, and because the RFC itself was supported by substantial evidence, this Court is unconvinced that the RFC did not adequately accommodate Claimant’s limitations.

An RFC assessment may account for supported mental limitations by restricting work pace and tasks involving others’ safety.

Rodriguez v. Berryhill · filed 2020-12-02

Based on our review of the record, we conclude that substantial evidence supports the ALJ’s findings regarding Rodriguez’s paragraph B criteria and his RFC at step four. ... The ALJ specifically accounted for the mild limitations that Rodriguez presented by limiting his RFC to exclude working at production rate pace or performing tasks involving the safety and welfare of others.

Section 404.1545 requires an RFC assessment to rest on relevant record evidence; an ALJ cannot supply an unsupported lifting capacity through lay opinion.

(SS) Cortez v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2020-12-02(a)

Having reviewed the parties’ arguments and the record, the undersigned concludes that the ALJ impermissibly relied on his lay opinion in determining that plaintiff could occasionally lift 50 pounds at work.

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

Hall v. Saul · filed 2020-12-03(a)(2)

In making the RFC finding, the ALJ must consider all of the claimant’s impairments, including impairments that are not severe. 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1545(a)(2), 416.945(a)(2).

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

Croft v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2020-12-04(a)(3)

In crafting an RFC, the ALJ must consider “all of the relevant medical and other evidence” in the record. 20 C.F.R. § 404.1545(a)(3); see also Craft v. Astrue, 539 F.3d 668, 676 (7th Cir. 2008). ... Dr. Lutz did not solely rely on Mr. C’s subjective symptoms, and the ALJ erred in failing to consider the objective evidence discussed in the opinion.

Section 404.1545(b) includes manual dexterity in a claimant’s physical residual functional capacity.

Leyba v. Social Security Administration · filed 2020-12-07(b)

Mr. Leyba’s manual dexterity is part of his RFC. See 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1545(b), 416.945(b).

Section 404.1545(a) defines residual functional capacity as what a claimant can do despite limitations, including physical and mental limitations.

Lozina v. Saul · filed 2020-12-08(a)

The RFC is defined as what the claimant can do despite his or her limitations and includes an assessment of physical abilities and mental impairments. 20 C.F.R. § 404.1545(a). ... The ALJ properly considered Plaintiff’s testimony, the medical record, and medical opinions in determining the RFC, which is supported by substantial evidence in the record.

A residual functional capacity assessment must account for a claimant’s moderate limitations in concentration, persistence, and pace.

Niquette v. Saul · filed 2020-12-09(a)(2)

Accordingly, on remand the ALJ shall ensure that Niquette’s moderate limitations in concentration, persistence, and pace are incorporated into the RFC assessment.

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

ANDERSON v. COMMISSIONER OF SOCIAL SECURITY · filed 2020-12-09(a)(1)

A claimant’s RFC is the most that the claimant can do despite his limitations. 20 C.F.R. § 404.1545(a)(1). ... The record unquestionably contains substantial evidence to support the ALJ’s RFC determination.

Section 404.1545(e) requires an ALJ to consider the limiting effects of all impairments when assessing residual functional capacity, but does not require a reaching restriction without supporting evidence.

Cook v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2020-12-10(e)

Here, the ALJ was not required to include any “reaching” limitations because Plaintiff presented no evidence that would support functional limitations.

An ALJ assesses residual functional capacity from the record as a whole, including medical and nonmedical evidence.

Robinson v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2020-12-15(a)(3)

Here, substantial evidence from the record as a whole supported the ALJ’s RFC determination.

Residual functional capacity is the most a claimant can do despite physical and mental limitations, assessed using all relevant record evidence.

SMITH v. COMMISSIONER OF SOCIAL SECURITY · filed 2020-12-17(a)(1)

The ALJ must use all relevant evidence in the record to make the RFC assessment.

Section 404.1545(a)(1) defines residual functional capacity as the most a claimant can do in a work setting despite limitations; the assessment may account for mental symptoms through supported work restrictions.

Allesxandro v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2020-12-22(a)(1)

RFC is the most the claimant can do in a work setting “despite her limitations.” Young v. Barnhart, 362 F.3d 995, 1000–01 (7th Cir. 2004); see also 20 C.F.R. § 404.1545(a)(1); Social Security Ruling (“SSR”) 96–8p. ... And although Allesxandro reported difficulties related to her trichotillomania, such as handling stress, the ALJ accounted for Allesxandro’s alleged symptoms in the RFC. Critically, Allesxandro does not explain how these limitations are inadequate. For these reasons, the ALJ did not err in his mental RFC assessment.

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) Harvey v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2020-12-23(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.”

An RFC assessment must account for moderate limitations in adapting to workplace changes or explain their omission.

Garcia v. Social Security Administration · filed 2020-12-23(c)

But adaptive functioning is critical when performing unskilled work, even according to the Administration’s own regulations. See 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1545(c)). ... In light of Parker, the applicable regulations, and Tenth Circuit law interpreting those regulations, the Court ultimately concludes that the ALJ’s RFC assessment failed to account for Plaintiff’s moderate limitations in adaptive functioning.

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

Burton v. Saul · filed 2020-12-30(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). ... The ALJ’s RFC is supported by substantial evidence.

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

AELING v. COMMISSIONER OF SOCIAL SECURITY · filed 2020-12-30(a)(1)

A claimant’s RFC is the most that the claimant can do despite the claimant’s limitations. 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1545.(a)(1), 416.945(a)(1). ... The record unquestionably contains substantial evidence to support this RFC determination.

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

Gonzalez-Santiago v. Social Security · filed 2020-12-30(a)(1)

In assessing an individual’s impairments, the ALJ considers all of the relevant evidence in the case record to determine the most the individual can do in a work setting despite the limitations imposed by his mental and physical impairments. 20 C.F.R. § 404.1545(a)(1). ... The ALJ appropriately considered the medical evidence and opinions of record in determining his RFC. Thus, the ALJ’s RFC determination is supported by substantial evidence.

The Commissioner must obtain additional medical records when gaps in the record prevent a supported assessment of residual functional capacity.

Veal v. Saul · filed 2021-01-05(a)(3)

Nonetheless, the Court finds itself similarly hampered with respect to determining whether the ALJ properly concluded that plaintiff retains the ability to perform medium-exertion work, because the ALJ did not address the impact of plaintiff’s repeated episodes of pneumonia and/or bronchitis. ... The Court finds that the ALJ should have obtained additional records regarding plaintiff’s chronic respiratory illnesses.

An RFC describes an individual’s work-related abilities despite limitations.

Sparks v. Commissioner of Social Security Administration · filed 2021-01-05(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), 416.945(a)(1).

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

Morris v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2021-01-14(a)

The RFC finding is the Administrative Law Judge=s ultimate determination of what a claimant can still do despite his physical and mental limitations. 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1545(a), 404.1546(c). ... After review of the evidence in the record and the ALJ’s opinion, the ALJ’s RFC determination comports with applicable law and is supported by substantial evidence.

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

WATSON v. COMMISSIONER OF SOCIAL SECURITY · filed 2021-01-19(a)(1)

A claimant’s RFC is the most that the claimant can do despite the claimant’s limitations. 20 C.F.R. § 404.1545.(a)(1).

Section 404.1545(a)(1) defines residual functional capacity as the most a claimant can still do despite limitations, so the assessment need not include conditions described only as best for the claimant.

Stanley v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2021-01-25(a)(1)

However, RFC need not incorporate what is best for a claimant; rather, RFC describes the most a claimant can still do despite limitations.

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

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

The RFC is the most a claimant can do despite her limitations. 20 C.F.R. § 404.1545(a).

Section 404.1545(a)(1) describes residual functional capacity as a person’s work-related abilities despite limitations.

Ullman v. Commissioner of Social Security Administration · filed 2021-02-02(a)(1)

The RFC determination sets out an individual’s work-related abilities despite his or her limitations.

Residual functional capacity is the most a claimant can still do despite limitations and is assessed using all relevant evidence.

(SS) Delgado v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2021-02-11(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) defines residual functional capacity as the most a claimant can still do despite limitations.

CITERONI v. SAUL · filed 2021-02-16(a)

RFC refers to the most a claimant can still do despite his limitations. 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1545(a), 416.945(a).

Residual functional capacity is the most a claimant can still do despite limitations, assessed from all relevant evidence.

Mongeau v. Saul · filed 2021-02-18(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). ... The medical evidence supports the ALJ’s reduced range light work RFC for the relevant period.

Residual functional capacity measures what a claimant can still do despite limitations and is assessed based on all relevant evidence.

(SS) Gonzales v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2021-02-22(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).

Section 404.1545(a) defines residual functional capacity as what a person can still do despite limitations caused by impairments.

SACCO v. SAUL, COMMISSIONER OF SOCIAL SECURITY · filed 2021-02-25(a)

“Residual functional capacity is defined as that which an individual is still able to do despite the limitations caused by his or her impairment(s).” Burnett v. Comm’r of Soc. Sec., 220 F.3d 112, 121 (3d Cir. 2000) (quoting Hartranft v. Apfel, 181 F.3d 358, 359 n.1 (3d Cir. 1999)); see 20 C.F.R. § 404.1545(a).

Residual functional capacity is the most an individual can still do despite impairment-related limitations.

Cottrell v. SSA · filed 2021-03-03(a)(1)

An individual’s residual functional capacity is the most the individual can still do despite his or her impairment-related limitations. 20 CFR § 404.1545(a)(1).

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

Raby v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2021-03-04(a)(1)

An RFC is the most a claimant can do despite his or her limitations.

Residual functional capacity is the maximum work a claimant can perform despite her limitations.

Mason v. Saul · filed 2021-03-04(a)(1)

A claimant’s RFC is the maximum work that she can perform despite any limitations. See 20 C.F.R. § 404.1545(a)(1); SSR 96-8p, 1996 WL 374184, at *2.

Section 404.1545(a) defines residual functional capacity as what a claimant can do in a work setting despite physical and mental limitations.

Hawn v. Saul · filed 2021-03-08(a)

RFC is defined as what a claimant can do in a work setting despite his or her limitations and includes an assessment of physical abilities and mental impairments. 20 C.F.R. § 404.1545(a).

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

Rose v. Social Security Administration, Commissioner of · filed 2021-03-08(a)(1)

An RFC is the most a claimant can do despite her limitations.

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

BYERS v. COMMISSIONER OF SOCIAL SECURITY · filed 2021-03-09(a)(1)

A claimant’s RFC is the most that the claimant can do despite his or her limitations. 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1545(a)(1); 416.945(a)(1).

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

Allen v. Saul · filed 2021-03-11(a)(1)

An RFC assessment measures the most a person can do, despite her limitations, in a work setting. 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 limitations caused by impairments.

Brown v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2021-03-12(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.” Poe v. Comm’r of Soc. Sec., 342 F. App’x 149, 155 (6th Cir. 2009); see also 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1545(a), 416.945(a).

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

Mikell v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2021-03-15(a)(1)

As noted above, an RFC is “the most” Plaintiff can do despite his physical and mental limitations. 20 C.F.R. § 404.1545(a)(1). ... Accordingly, the Court finds that substantial evidence supports the RFC and, therefore, affirms on this issue.

Section 404.1545 treats residual functional capacity as an assessment of what a claimant can do at work despite limitations from all medically determinable impairments.

Duron v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2021-03-16

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 his medically determinable impairments. 20 C.F.R. § 404.1545. ... Nevertheless, the Court concludes that the ALJ’s error does not require reversal because the VE identified available jobs based on plaintiff’s actual limitations.

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

Jones v. Social Security Administration, Commissioner of · filed 2021-03-16(a)(1)

An RFC is the most a claimant can do despite his limitations. 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1545(a)(1) and 416.945(a)(1).

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

Helton v. Social Security Administration, Commissioner of · filed 2021-03-17(a)(1)

An RFC is the most a claimant can do despite his limitations. 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1545(a)(1) and 416.945(a)(1).

Residual functional capacity measures the most a claimant can do despite limitations and is determined from all relevant evidence, including severe and non-severe impairments.

Goodell v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2021-03-22(a)(1)-(2)

An RFC determination represents “the most [a claimant] can still do despite [their] limitations[,]’’ and is determined based on “all the relevant evidence” in the record, including evidence of both severe and non-severe medically determinable impairments. 20 C.F.R. § 404.1545(a)(1)-(2).

Residual functional capacity assesses what a claimant can do in a work setting despite limitations imposed by all medically determinable impairments.

Higginson v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2021-03-22

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.

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

Johnson v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2021-03-22

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. ... Here, the ALJ’s RFC accounted for plaintiff’s mental impairments.

Section 404.1545(a) defines residual functional capacity as what a claimant can do despite physical or mental limitations.

Hann v. Saul · filed 2021-03-23(a)

The Regulations define RFC as “what [the claimant] can do” despite her “physical or mental limitations.” 20 C.F.R. § 404.1545(a). ... The ALJ’s RFC determination is supported by substantial evidence in the record as a whole.

Section 404.1545(a)(1) defines residual functional capacity as the most a claimant can still do despite limitations; the assessed capacity must be supported by substantial evidence.

Snead v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2021-03-23(a)(1)

A plaintiff’s RFC “is defined as the ‘most a [claimant] can still do despite [the claimant’s] limitations.’” Sullivan v. Comm’r of Social Sec., 595 Fed. Appx. 502, 505 (6th Cir. Dec. 12, 2014) (quoting 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1545(a)(1)); Poe v. Comm’r of Soc. Sec., 342 F. App’x 149, 155 (6th Cir. 2009). ... In sum, the Court determines after de novo review that the ALJ’s decision was within the permissible zone of choice, and that the assessed RFC is supported by substantial evidence.

Section 404.1545 defines residual functional capacity as the most a claimant can still do despite limitations and requires an assessment of the claimant’s ability to meet work requirements.

Bunn v. Social Security Administration, Commissioner · filed 2021-03-29(a)

As previously discussed, at step four of the sequential analysis the ALJ formulates a claimant’s RFC by assessing his or her “ability to meet the physical, mental, sensory, and other requirements of work.” 20 C.F.R. § 404.1545(a)(4). The claimant’s RFC represents “the most [he or she] can still do despite [their] limitations.” 20 C.F.R. § 404.1545(a)(1). ... Therefore, the ALJ did not commit legal error in assessing an RFC for light work.

Section 404.1545(a)(1) defines residual functional capacity as what a claimant can do despite impairments and limitations.

Gray v. Commissioner, Social Security Administration · filed 2021-03-29(a)(1)

Moreover, the RFC is a determination of what a complainant can do despite impairments and limitations. 20 C.F.R. § 404.1545(a)(1). As a result, plaintiff’s arguments are unpersuasive, and the Court finds that the ALJ’s RFC determination is supported by substantial evidence in the record.

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

Tolliver v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2021-03-29(a)(1), (a)(3)

RFC is defined as the most Plaintiff can still do despite his limitations and is based on an evaluation of all the relevant evidence in the record. See 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1520(e), 404.1545(a)(1) and (a)(3); Social Security Ruling (“SSR”) 96-8p, 1996 WL 374184.

Section 404.1545(a)(1) defines residual functional capacity as the most a claimant can do despite her limitations; the ALJ assesses it using the evidence in the record.

McNeely v. Saul · filed 2021-03-29(a)(1)

A claimant’s RFC is “the most a claimant can do despite [her] limitations.” Moore, 572 F.3d at 523 (citing 20 C.F.R. § 404.1545(a)(1)). ... In sum, the Court finds that rather than unquestioningly adopting Dr. Giuffra’s opinion, the ALJ properly considered the objective medical evidence and other evidence in the record and came to an RFC assessment that captured Plaintiff’s limitations.

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

Price v. Saul · filed 2021-03-30(a)(1)

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

Section 404.1545(a) defines residual functional capacity as a claimant’s maximum remaining ability to work despite medically determinable impairments.

Gillman v. Commissioner, Social Security Administration · filed 2021-03-30(a)

Generally, the RFC finding reflects a disability claimant’s maximum remaining ability to perform work activities despite his or her medically determinable impairments.

Residual functional capacity is the most a claimant can do despite limitations, assessed by the ALJ from the full record.

Rosenbalm v. Commissioner, Social Security Administration · filed 2021-03-30

The RFC is the most a claimant can do despite their limitations. 20 C.F.R. § 404.1545. It is an administrative assessment made by the ALJ based on the totality of the evidence in the record. 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1545; 404.1560.

Section 404.1545(a)(1) defines residual functional capacity as what a claimant can do despite impairments and limitations, so symptoms need not be completely controlled for a claimant to have a capacity to work.

Larue v. Commissioner, Social Security Administration · filed 2021-03-31(a)(1)

The Court also notes that the RFC is a determination of what a complainant can do despite impairments and limitations. 20 C.F.R. § 404.1545(a)(1). Thus, a claimant may not necessarily be entitled to benefits even where the symptoms or effects of severe disabilities are not completely controlled.

Section 404.1545 defines residual functional capacity as the most a claimant can do on a regular and continuing basis despite physical and mental limitations.

Ambush v. Saul · filed 2021-03-31(b)–(c)

The RFC is an assessment that represents the most a claimant can do despite any physical and mental limitations on a “regular and continuing basis.” 20 C.F.R. § 404.1545(b)–(c) (2012).

Section 404.1545(a)(1) requires an RFC assessment to determine the most a claimant can do despite limitations.

Colladay v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2021-04-07(a)(1)

When assessing RFC, the ALJ determines the most one can do despite limitations, not the least one can do. See 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1545(a)(1), 416.945(a)(1). Dr. DeLira thus opined that plaintiff had up to a fair ability to maintain regular attendance, complete a normal workday without interruptions from symptoms, and work at a sufficient pace.

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

Warmbold v. Saul · filed 2021-04-12(a)(1)

An RFC assessment measures the most a person can do, despite his limitations, in a work setting. 20 C.F.R. § 404.1545(a)(1).

Section 404.1545(a)(1) defines residual functional capacity as what a person can still do despite limitations from physical and mental impairments.

Munson v. Saul · filed 2021-04-14(a)(1)

The residual functional capacity (“RFC”) is what a person is still capable of doing despite limitations resulting from his physical and mental impairments. See 20 C.F.R. §§404.1545(a)(1), 416.945(a)(1).

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) Linan v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2021-06-17(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.”

Section 404.1545(a) defines residual functional capacity as what a claimant can still do despite physical or mental limitations, assessed using all relevant evidence.

Dotson v. Saul · filed 2021-06-21(a)

RFC is defined as “what [the claimant] can still do” despite his “physical or mental limitations.” 20 C.F.R. § 404.1545(a). The ALJ 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. ... Substantial evidence in the record as a whole supports the ALJ’s RFC determination, so I will affirm the decision of the Commissioner as within a “reasonable zone of choice.”

Section 404.1545(a)(3) requires the ALJ to consider all relevant evidence, including the claimant’s statements and medical assessments, when determining residual functional capacity.

Diaz v. Andrew M.Saul · filed 2021-06-22(a)(3)

In determining a claimant’s RFC, the ALJ considers all relevant evidence, including a claimant’s statements and residual functional capacity assessments made by consultative examiners, State Agency physicians, and medical experts.

Section 404.1545 requires an RFC assessment to consider the claimant’s credible limitations and the relevant evidence of record.

Wells v. Saul · filed 2021-06-22

A claimant’s RFC is the most an individual can do despite the combined effects of his credible limitations. See 20 C.F.R. § 404.1545. ... Because the ALJ based his RFC assessment upon review of all the credible, relevant evidence of record, and the RFC is supported by some medical evidence, it will not be disturbed.

Residual functional capacity describes what a claimant can still do despite physical and mental limitations.

Wilson v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2021-06-23(a)

The RFC finding is an Administrative Law Judge’s ultimate determination of what a claimant can still do despite his physical and mental limitations.

Residual functional capacity is determined from all relevant medical and other evidence, including the claimant’s testimony, objective medical evidence, and medical opinions.

Martinez v. Berryhill · filed 2021-06-23(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 subjective testimony, objective medical evidence, and medical opinions from treating and consulting sources.

Section 404.1545 requires an ALJ to consider limitations from non-severe mental impairments when assessing residual functional capacity, but does not require every limitation found at step two to appear in the final assessment.

Malley v. Saul · filed 2021-06-24(a)(2)–(3)

Mental functional limits found at step two must be considered during the RFC assessment, but those limits will not necessarily become limits within a claimant’s RFC.

Section 404.1545 requires the ALJ to consider a claimant’s remaining ability to perform tasks, limitations, descriptions of impairments, medical evidence, and other relevant evidence when assessing residual functional capacity.

McCormick v. Berryhill · filed 2021-06-25

In determining a claimant’s RFC, the ALJ must consider the tasks that can be performed by a claimant despite any physical or mental limitations, and the ALJ will evaluate medical, physical and mental factors; the claimant’s descriptions of impairments and limitations; relevant medical evidence; and other relevant evidence.

Section 404.1545(a)(1) requires an ALJ to consider all relevant evidence when setting residual functional capacity, including medical records, lay evidence, and the effects of attributable symptoms.

Avalos v. Saul · filed 2021-06-25(a)(1)

In setting an RFC, an ALJ must consider all relevant evidence, including medical records, lay evidence, and “the effects of symptoms, including pain, that are reasonably attributable to the medical condition.” Robbins, 466 F.3d at 883 (citation omitted); 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1545(a)(1), 416.945(a)(1). ... The ALJ properly considered the conflict between Dr. Newman’s opinion and Dr. Yu’s opinion, in assessing the opinions, assigning weight, and fashioning the RFC.

Residual functional capacity is the most a claimant can still do despite limitations; supported limits on contact with others may be included in the assessment.

Taylor v. Commissioner Social Security Administration · filed 2021-06-28(a)(1)

The “residual functional capacity is the most [a claimant] can still do despite [his] limitations,” 20 C.F.R. § 404.1545(a)(1). ... The ALJ expressly acknowledged Plaintiff's impairment in his ability to interact with others by prohibiting contact with the public and allowing only occasional, superficial conduct with coworkers.

Residual functional capacity measures the most a claimant can still do despite limitations and is assessed using all relevant evidence.

(SS) Ramirez v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2021-06-28(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.”

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

Jones v. Social Security · filed 2021-06-28(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.” Poe v. Comm’r of Soc. Sec., 342 F. App’x 149, 155 (6th Cir. 2009); see also 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1545(a), 416.945(a). ... The ALJ did not err in her assessment of Plaintiff’s headaches. She considered the record as a whole and concluded that Plaintiff’s headaches were not disabling and concluded the limitations in the RFC adequately accounted for Plaintiff’s conditions, including her headaches.

A mental residual functional capacity finding must be supported by evidence showing how the claimant’s impairments affect the ability to work; an ALJ cannot infer those effects from treatment records without medical assistance.

Matlock v. Commissioner, Social Security Administration · filed 2021-06-28(a)(1)

But the ALJ fails to identify any evidence clearly establishing the actual effect Plaintiff’s mental conditions had on his ability to work. See Ripley, 67 F.3d at 557. And it is improper for the ALJ to infer what Plaintiff’s mental capabilities to work are based on her own interpretation of those records – at least without the assistance of an examining or treating physician.

Section 404.1545(a)(3) requires the adjudicator to assess residual functional capacity using all relevant evidence; the adjudicator need not discuss every medical source statement.

Foster v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2021-06-29(a)(3)

While Plaintiff faults the ALJ for not discussing every medical source statement, the ALJ was not required to do so. First, opinion evidence is only one type of evidence that an ALJ is required to consider.

An RFC assessment considers all relevant evidence; an unexplained omission of a medical limitation can be harmless when the identified jobs do not require the affected ability.

Chaloux v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2021-06-30(a)(1)-(2)

It was thus error for the ALJ to fail to explain why he did not adopt the state agency consultants’ limitations on social interaction. ... Because the jobs cited by the VE do not involve significant interaction with coworkers and supervisors, the ALJ’s failure to explain his deviation from the limitations on social interaction opined by Drs. Petty and Hurley was harmless.

Section 404.1545(a)(1) defines residual functional capacity as what a claimant can still do despite exertional and nonexertional limitations.

Golar v. Saul · filed 2021-06-30(a)(1)

As noted above, an RFC is what a claimant can still do despite existing exertional and nonexertional limitations. See 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1545(a)(1).

An ALJ assesses residual functional capacity from all relevant medical and other evidence; the assessment need not mirror a medical opinion.

Johnson v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2021-07-01(a)

As stated previously, the ALJ has the responsibility to determine a claimant’s RFC, based on all of the relevant medical and other evidence in the record. See 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1527(d)(2), 404.1545(a), 404.1546(c). To require an RFC to mirror a medical opinion would conflict with an ALJ’s duties.

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

Baker v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2021-07-02(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)(3) requires the ALJ to assess residual functional capacity using relevant medical and non-medical evidence, including medical-source statements about what the claimant can still do.

Lazer v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2021-07-06(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. ... Therefore, the ALJ reasonably determined that the evidence in the record, including Dr. Dave’s opinin, supported an RFC for light work.

Section 404.1545 describes residual functional capacity as a person’s work-related abilities despite limitations.

Hess v. Commissioner of Social Security Administration · filed 2021-07-06(a)(1)

The RFC determination sets out an individual’s work-related abilities despite his or her limitations.

Residual functional capacity measures the most a claimant can still do despite limitations, so an opinion describing the least the claimant can do does not establish it.

Lowe v. Kijakazi · filed 2021-08-31(a)(1)

Dr. Ritvo commented that his April 2019 opinion was based on Plaintiff’s functioning “when most de-stabilized” (AR 425), but this statement does not bolster the opinion because RFC is the most a claimant can do, whereas Dr. Ritvo expressly opined as to the least Plaintiff could do.

An RFC describes the most a claimant can do despite limitations and need not reflect the claimant’s optimal work environment.

Woodcook v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2021-12-13(a)(1)

However, an RFC need not incorporate what would be an optimal work environment, but rather it must describe the most a claimant can do despite limitations. SSR 96-8p, 1996 SSR LEXIS 5 at *2; 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1545(a)(1), 416.945(a)(1).

Residual functional capacity measures what a claimant can do despite limitations; it does not require the claimant to be pain free.

(SS) Smith v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2022-01-31(a)(1)

The RFC is not the most one can do while remaining pain free. Rather, it is the most one can do despite one’s limitations. See 20 C.F.R. § 404.1545(a)(1).

Section 404.1545(a)(1) defines residual functional capacity as the most a claimant can do despite limitations, and the Commissioner must assess it before step four.

Choden v. Saul · filed 2022-01-31(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)).

Section 404.1545(a) defines residual functional capacity as what a claimant can still do despite limitations and requires the assessment to consider all relevant evidence.

CALDWELL v. KIJAKAZI · filed 2022-01-31(a)

RFC refers to the most a claimant can still do despite his limitations. 20 C.F.R. § 404.1545(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.

Section 404.1545(a)(3) calls for an RFC assessment based on all relevant medical and other evidence; an adequately explained assessment can satisfy that requirement.

Geer v. Commissioner of Social Security Administration · filed 2022-01-31(a)(3)

Here, unlike in Mascio, the court finds that the ALJ sufficiently explained the claimant’s residual functional capacity and the Plaintiff has failed to direct the court to sufficient contradictory evidence in the record.

Section 404.1545(a)(1) defines residual functional capacity as the most a claimant can do despite limitations; an opinion stating a minimum ability does not establish that maximum.

Webb v. Social Security Administration, Commissioner of (TV1) · filed 2022-01-31(a)(1)

Dr. Goewey’s opinion set a floor—saying that Plaintiff could stand and walk “at least two hours daily” [Tr. 571]—but an RFC is the most a claimant can do despite her limitations.

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

Carson v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2022-02-01(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. ... And at the very least, both opinions are relevant to, and probative of, the resulting RFC.

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

Torres-Velez v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2022-02-01(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 her limitations.

Section 404.1545(a) requires residual functional capacity to be assessed from the full record, including how a claimant’s impairments and symptoms affect work-related activities.

Martin v. Kijakazi · filed 2022-02-02(a)

While Plaintiff alleges that her medical evidence provides support for a “much more restrictive RFC,” the RFC is an administrative assessment based on the totality of the evidence and extent to which a claimant’s impairments and related symptoms affect her capacity to do work-related activities. 20 C.F.R. § 404.1545(a), 416.945(a).

Section 404.1545(a)(1) describes residual functional capacity as a person’s work-related abilities despite limitations.

Klapp v. Commissioner of Social Security Administration · filed 2022-02-02(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).

Section 404.1545(a) requires an RFC assessment to consider physical and mental abilities, symptoms, and limitations that could interfere with sustained work.

Oakes v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2022-02-03(a)

“In making a residual functional capacity determination, the ALJ must consider a claimant’s physical abilities, mental abilities, [and] symptomology, including pain and other limitations which could interfere | with work activities on a regular and continuing basis.” Id. (citing 20 C.F.R. § 404.1545(a)).

An ALJ assessing residual functional capacity must consider all physical and mental impairments, including those that are not severe, and explain how they affect the claimant’s ability to work.

Goll v. Saul · filed 2022-02-04(a)(2)

An ALJ must “consider all of the claimant’s ‘physical and mental impairments, severe and otherwise, and determine, on a function-by-function basis, how they affect [her] ability to work.’” Thomas v. Berryhill, 916 F.3d 307, 311 (4th Cir. 2019) (quoting Monroe v. Colvin, 826 F.3d 176, 188 (4th Cir. 2016)); see also 20 C.F.R. § 404.1545(a)(2); SSR 96-8p, 61 Fed. Reg. 34,474, 34,475 (July 2, 1996).

An RFC assessment considers all relevant medical and other evidence when determining what a claimant can still do despite her limitations.

Dawson v. Commissioner of the Social Security Administration · filed 2022-02-07(a)(1), (a)(3)

The RFC is assessed “based on all the relevant evidence in [the] case record[,]” including “all of the relevant medical and other evidence.” 20 C.F.R. §§404.1545(a)(1), (3). ... The record contains substantial evidence that supports the ALJ’s RFC determination. Accordingly, the Court finds that the RFC assessment is supported by substantial evidence of record.

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

Miller v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2022-02-07(a)

The residual functional capacity assessment is the most a claimant can do despite his or her limitations and is an administrative finding, not a medical opinion.

Residual functional capacity is the maximum work a claimant can perform despite her limitations.

Michaels v. Saul · filed 2022-02-08(a)(1)

A claimant’s RFC is the maximum work that she can perform despite any limitations.

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

Brewster v. Kijakazi · filed 2022-02-08(a)(1)

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

Section 404.1545 permits an RFC assessment supported by an explanation of how reported symptoms and medical evidence bear on the claimant’s ability to work.

Arnold v. Saul · filed 2022-02-08

With respect to the merits, the Court finds that there is substantial evidence to support the ALJ’s conclusion with respect to the formulation of the RFC and the related explanation of how the ALJ arrived at that conclusion. ... Further, the ALJ described how she considered Plaintiff’s reports alongside the medical evidence showing controlled symptoms, good pulmonary function, and the potential for additional improvement with smoking cessation in determining Plaintiff’s ability to meet the requirements of light exertional work (Tr. 19-23). 20 C.F.R. § 404.1545; SSR 96-8p.

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

Murray v. Saul · filed 2022-02-09(a)(1)

RFC is “the most [a claimant] can do despite [his or her] limitations.” 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1545, 416.945.

Section 404.1545(a) defines residual functional capacity as what an individual can still do despite limitations caused by impairments.

VULPE v. KIJAKAZI · filed 2022-02-10(a)

Residual functional capacity (“RFC”) is defined as “that which an individual is still able to do despite the limitations caused by [his impairments].” 20 C.F.R. § 404.1545(a); see also Fargnoli v. Massanari, 247 F.3d 34, 40 (3d Cir. 2001).

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

HARKINS v. COMMISSIONER OF SOCIAL SECURITY · filed 2022-02-10(a)

To that end, an ALJ is charged with formulating the RFC based on all of the relevant evidence. See 20 C.F.R. §§404.1545(a), 416.945(a). After a careful review and reading the decision of the ALJ as a whole, and contrary to Plaintiff’s assertions otherwise, the Court finds the ALJ did just that.

Residual functional capacity is what a claimant can still do despite limitations caused by impairments.

JOHNSON v. SAUL · filed 2022-04-13(a)

Residual functional capacity (“RFC”) is defined as “that which an individual is still able to do despite the limitations caused by [his impairments].” 20 C.F.R. § 404.1545(a); see also Fargnoli v. Massanari, 247 F.3d 34, 40 (3d Cir. 2001).

Section 404.1545(a) requires an RFC assessment to consider all relevant evidence, including evidence of whether a claimant needs time off task to recover from seizures.

HART v. COMMISSIONER OF SOCIAL SECURITY · filed 2022-04-13(a)

As set forth above, RFC refers to the most a claimant can still do despite his or her limitations. See Fargnoli, 247 F.3d at 40; 20 C.F.R. § 404.1545(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 or her own limitations. See id. Here, the ALJ acknowledged Plaintiff’s seizures but did not address whether and to what extent they affect her ability to be on-task.

Section 404.1545(a) requires residual functional capacity to be assessed using all relevant medical and other evidence of what a claimant can still do despite limitations.

Telias v. Saul · filed 2022-04-14(a)

RFC is “the most [a claimant] can still do” in a work setting despite his or her limitations, and it is assessed “based on all of the relevant medical and other evidence.” 20 C.F.R. § 404.1545(a).

Residual functional capacity is the most a claimant can still do in a work setting despite her limitations.

Caldwell v. Kijakazi · filed 2022-04-14(a)(1)

RFC is defined as the most a plaintiff can still do in a work setting despite her limitations.

Section 404.1545(a) governs the assessment of what work a claimant can still do despite her limitations, including the effects of a pulmonary impairment.

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

The ALJ considered Martin’s asbestos lung disease and subjective symptoms and properly considered the objective testing and other exam findings as well as the recommended conservative course of treatment in determining her residual functional capacity.

Residual functional capacity is the most a claimant can still do despite limitations and is assessed based on all relevant evidence.

(SS) Simmons, Jr. v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2022-04-18(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) requires an RFC assessment to account for medically supported functional limitations, including limitations in concentration, persistence, and pace.

STEWART v. KIJAKAZI · filed 2022-04-18(a)

When determining the RFC, the Regulations and Seventh Circuit case law make clear that an ALJ's RFC assessment must incorporate all of a claimant's functional limitations supported by the medical record. ... Because the ALJ failed to explain how or why restricting Anthony to unskilled work adequately accounted for Plaintiff's recognized mental impairments, the Court is unable to find the "requisite logical bridge" between the evidence and his conclusion.

Section 404.1545(a) describes residual functional capacity as the work-related abilities a claimant retains despite limitations.

Duty v. Commissioner of Social Security Administration · filed 2022-04-19(a)

The RFC determination sets out an individual’s work-related abilities despite his or her limitations. See 20 C.F.R. § 404.1545(a); 20 C.F.R. § 416.945(a).

An RFC assessment may rely on an opinion allowing frequent balancing, stooping, and crouching despite a walking restriction because those postural activities do not directly affect the ability to walk.

Conway v. Commissioner of Social Security Administration · filed 2022-04-22(a)(1)

The ALJ did not err in relying on Dr. Sampat’s opinion or in finding Plaintiff’s RFC. ... Thus, Dr. Sampat’s opinion and the ALJ’s finding on Plaintiff’s ability to balance, stoop, and crouch does not contradict their views on Plaintiff’s ability to walk.

Section 404.1545(a) requires the ALJ to consider all relevant evidence when assessing residual functional capacity, including medical records and descriptions of limitations by the claimant and others.

GUERREIRO v. COMMISSIONER OF SOCIAL SECURITY · filed 2022-04-22(a)

In determining an individual’s residual functional capacity in 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. ... As such, the Court finds the ALJ’s RFC determination to be based in sufficient medical evidence in the record.