20 C.F.R. § 416.920

Section 416.920(e) requires the Commissioner to assess a claimant’s residual functional capacity after step three and use that assessment at steps four and five.

Gilliland v. Social Security Administration, Commissioner of · filed 2022-11-30(e)

The Commissioner uses the familiar five-step sequential process to evaluate a claim of disability. 20 C.F.R. § 416.920; ... After evaluating step three, the Commissioner assesses claimant’s RFC. 20 C.F.R. § 416.920(e). This assessment is used at both step four and step five of the sequential evaluation process. Id.

Section 416.920(e) requires the residual functional capacity assessment to account for all of the claimant’s impairments, including impairments that are not severe.

(SS) Brunson v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2022-12-05(e)

The RFC must consider all of the claimant’s impairments, including those that are not severe. 20 C.F.R. §§ 416.920(e), 416.945(a)(2); Social Security Ruling (“SSR”) 96–8p.

Section 416.920(e) requires the ALJ to determine the claimant’s residual functional capacity before deciding step four and to consider all of the claimant’s impairments, including non-severe impairments.

(SS) Vang v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2022-12-19(e)

Before making the step four determination, the ALJ first must determine the claimant’s RFC. 20 C.F.R. § 416.920(e); Nowden v. Berryhill, No. EDCV 17-00584-JEM, 2018 WL 1155971, at *2 (C.D. Cal. Mar. 2, 2018). The RFC is “the most [one] can still do despite [his] limitations” and represents an assessment “based on all the relevant evidence.” 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1545(a)(1), 416.945(a)(1). The RFC must consider all of the claimant’s impairments, including those that are not severe. 20 C.F.R. §§ 416.920(e), 416.945(a)(2); Social Security Ruling (“SSR”) 96-8p, available at 1996 WL 374184 (Jul. 2, 1996).

Section 416.920(e) requires the Commissioner to assess a claimant’s residual functional capacity after step three for use at steps four and five of the sequential evaluation.

Hockett v. Social Security Administration, Commissioner of · filed 2023-02-23(e)

After evaluating step three, the Commissioner assesses claimant’s residual functional capacity (RFC). 20 C.F.R. § 416.920(e). This assessment is used at both step four and step five of the sequential evaluation process.

Section 416.920(e) requires the residual functional capacity assessment to consider all of the claimant’s impairments, including those that are not severe.

(SS) Howard v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2023-03-31(e)

The RFC must consider all of the claimant’s impairments, including those that are not severe.

Section 416.920(e) requires the ALJ to determine residual functional capacity before step four and to account for all of the claimant's impairments, including those that are not severe.

(SS) Madrid v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2023-04-06(e)

Before making the step four determination, the ALJ first must determine the claimant’s RFC. 20 C.F.R. § 416.920(e); Nowden v. Berryhill, No. EDCV 17-00584-JEM, 2018 WL 1155971, at *2 (C.D. Cal. Mar. 2, 2018). ... The RFC must consider all of the claimant’s impairments, including those that are not severe. 20 C.F.R. §§ 416.920(e); 416.945(a)(2); Social Security Ruling (“SSR”) 96-8p, available at 1996 WL 374184 (Jul. 2, 1996).

Section 416.920(e) requires the ALJ to determine a claimant’s residual functional capacity before step four and to consider all of the claimant’s impairments, including nonsevere impairments.

(SS) Mazon v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2023-05-01(e)

Before making the step four determination, the ALJ first must determine the claimant’s RFC. 20 C.F.R. § 416.920(e); Nowden v. Berryhill, No. EDCV 17-00584-JEM, 2018 WL 1155971, at *2 (C.D. Cal. Mar. 2, 2018). The RFC is “the most [one] can still do despite [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 RFC must consider all of the claimant’s impairments, including those that are not severe. 20 C.F.R. §§ 416.920(e); 416.945(a)(2); Social Security Ruling (“SSR”) 96-8p, available at 1996 WL 374184 (Jul. 2, 1996).

At the RFC stage before step four, the ALJ must consider all of the claimant’s impairments, including non-severe impairments.

(SS) Blanco v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2023-06-02(e)

The RFC must consider all of the claimant’s impairments, including those that are not severe. 20 C.F.R. §§ 416.920(e), 416.945(a)(2); Social Security Ruling (“SSR”) 96–8p.

Section 416.920(e) requires the ALJ to assess a claimant’s residual functional capacity before making the step-four determination.

(SS)Kuhn v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2023-06-14(e)

Before making the step four determination, the ALJ first must determine the claimant’s RFC. 20 C.F.R. § 416.920(e); ... The RFC must consider all of the claimant’s impairments, including those that are not severe. 20 C.F.R. §§ 416.920(e); 416.945(a)(2); Social Security Ruling (“SSR”) 96-8p, available at 1996 WL 374184 (Jul. 2, 1996). ... Based on the applicable caselaw and regulations before the Court, the Court concludes the ALJ’s RFC assessment to be based on substantial evidence in the record, and Plaintiff has not demonstrated that the ALJ erred by failing to further develop the record.

Section 416.920(e) requires the ALJ to determine the claimant’s residual functional capacity before step four and to account for all impairments, including nonsevere impairments, in that assessment.

(SS) Keener v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2023-07-10(e)

Before making the step four determination, the ALJ first must determine the claimant’s RFC. 20 C.F.R. § 416.920(e); Nowden v. Berryhill, No. EDCV 17-00584-JEM, 2018 WL 1155971, at *2 (C.D. Cal. Mar. 2, 2018). ... The RFC must consider all of the claimant’s impairments, including those that are not severe. 20 C.F.R. §§ 416.920(e), 416.945(a)(2); Social Security Ruling (“SSR”) 96-8p, available at 1996 WL 374184 (Jul. 2, 1996). ... Upon review of the ALJ’s evaluation of the full record, the Court finds the ALJ properly synthesized the medical evidence, resolved conflicts and ambiguities in the medical testimony, and determined credibility in order to reach a well-supported RFC determination, Andrews, 53 F.3d at 1039; Batson, 359 F.3d at 1195; Lingenfelter, 504 F.3d at 1042, such that the ALJ’s ultimate conclusion of nondisability is adequately supported by substantial evidence.

Section 416.920(e) requires the ALJ to assess the claimant’s residual functional capacity while evaluating whether the claimant can perform past relevant work, considering all of the claimant’s supported impairments.

Jones v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2023-07-20(e)

The ALJ need not identify all severe impairments at step two if he considers all impairments, severe or not, in step three, Heatly v. Comm’r of Soc. Sec., 382 F. App’x 823, 825 (11th Cir. 2010), and when determining Ms. Jones’s RFC, 20 C.F.R. § 416.920(e). The ALJ did not consider all of Ms. Jones’s records and complaints of headaches in his RFC determination, the ALJ simply considered “[Ms. Jones’s] non-severe headaches and alleged syncopal episodes.” (Tr. 51).

At Step Four, the ALJ must determine a claimant’s residual functional capacity by considering all relevant and other evidence.

Swanson v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2023-07-28(e)

At Step Four of the sequential evaluation process, the ALJ must determine a claimant’s RFC by considering all relevant and other evidence. 20 C.F.R. § 416.920(e). ... The ALJ complied with the regulations by: (i) assessing Swanson’s RFC in light of the medical evidence, his testimony, and other evidence in the record; and (ii) clearly explaining that he rejected Swanson’s subjective symptom complains because his statements regarding the intensity, persistence, and limiting effects of his symptoms were not entirely consistent with the objective evidence. 20 C.F.R. § 416.920(e); SSR 16-3p, 2016 SSR LEXIS 4, at *3–4, 11–12, 15; SSR 96-8p, 1996 SSR LEXIS 5, at *13–15; (Tr. 20–24).

Section 416.920(e) requires the ALJ to determine a claimant’s residual functional capacity before step four and to consider all of the claimant’s impairments, including nonsevere impairments, in doing so.

(SS) Gabriel v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2023-08-31(e)

Before making the step four determinations, the ALJ first must determine the claimant’s RFC. 20 C.F.R. § 416.920(e). ... The RFC must consider all of the claimant’s impairments, including those that are not severe. 20 C.F.R. § 416.920(e); § 416.945(a)(2).

Section 416.920(e) requires the ALJ to determine a claimant’s residual functional capacity before step four and assess it using all relevant evidence, including limitations from nonsevere impairments.

(SS) Parra v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2023-10-31(e)

Before making the step four determinations, the ALJ first must determine the claimant’s RFC. 20 C.F.R. § 416.920(e). The RFC is the most a claimant can still do despite their limitations and represents an assessment based on all relevant evidence. 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1545(a)(1); 416.945(a)(1)). The RFC must consider all of the claimant’s impairments, including those that are not severe. 20 C.F.R. §§ 416.920(e), 416.945(a)(2). ... At bottom, it is clear the ALJ formulated Plaintiff’s second RFC based on her interpretation of four treatment notes and not on medical judgment, which is improper.

Subsection (e) requires the residual functional capacity to be assessed using all relevant medical and other evidence in the case record.

Davis v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2023-11-02(e)

Thus, opinion evidence is only one type of evidence that an ALJ is required to consider. See 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1520(e), 416.920(e) (“we will assess the residual functional capacity based on all the relevant medical and other evidence in your case record”); 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1545(a)(3), 416.945(a)(3) (explaining that the adjudicator will assess the RFC based on all the relevant evidence in the case record); 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1513(a)(1),(4), 416.913(a)(1),(4) (explaining that evidence that can be considered includes objective medical evidence, such as medical signs and laboratory findings; as well as evidence from nonmedical sources, including the claimant, such as from forms contained in the administrative record).

Section 416.920(e) requires the ALJ to determine the claimant’s residual functional capacity before step four and to consider all of the claimant’s impairments, including nonsevere impairments, in that assessment.

(SS) Macquarrie v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2023-11-28(e)

Before making the step four determinations, the ALJ first must determine the claimant’s RFC. 20 C.F.R. § 416.920(e). The RFC is the most a claimant can still do despite their limitations and represents an assessment based on all relevant evidence. 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1545(a)(1); 416.945(a)(1)). The RFC must consider all of the claimant’s impairments, including those that are not severe. 20 C.F.R. §§ 416.920(e), 416.945(a)(2).

Section 416.920(e) requires the residual functional capacity assessment to consider all of a claimant’s impairments, including impairments that are not severe.

(SS) Ramos v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2023-12-29(e)

The RFC must consider all of the claimant’s impairments, including those that are not severe. 20 C.F.R. §§ 416.920(e), 416.945(a)(2); Social Security Ruling (“SSR”) 96–8p.

Section 416.920(e) requires the ALJ to determine a claimant’s residual functional capacity by considering all relevant medical and other evidence.

Allen v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2024-01-05(e)

At Step Four, the ALJ must determine a claimant’s RFC by considering all relevant medical and other evidence. 20 C.F.R. § 416.920(e).

Section 416.920(e) requires the ALJ to determine a claimant’s residual functional capacity before deciding whether the claimant can perform past relevant work, considering all impairments, including nonsevere ones.

(SS) Mortera v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2024-01-22(e)

Before making the step four determination, the ALJ first must determine the claimant’s RFC. 20 C.F.R. § 416.920(e); Nowden v. Berryhill, No. EDCV 17-00584-JEM, 2018 WL 1155971, at *2 (C.D. Cal. Mar. 2, 2018). The RFC is “the most [one] can still do despite [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 RFC must consider all of the claimant’s impairments, including those that are not severe. 20 C.F.R. §§ 416.920(e); 416.945(a)(2); Social Security Ruling (“SSR”) 96-8p, available at 1996 WL 374184 (Jul. 2, 1996).

Section 416.920(e) requires the ALJ to determine a claimant’s residual functional capacity before deciding step four, based on all relevant evidence and all of the claimant’s impairments, including nonsevere impairments.

(SS) Page v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2024-01-30(e)

Before making the step four determinations, the ALJ first must determine the claimant’s RFC. 20 C.F.R. § 416.920(e). The RFC is the most a claimant can still do despite their limitations and represents an assessment based on all relevant evidence. 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1545(a)(1); 416.945(a)(1)). The RFC must consider all of the claimant’s impairments, including those that are not severe. 20 C.F.R. §§ 416.920(e), 416.945(a)(2).

Section 416.920(e) requires the ALJ to determine the claimant’s residual functional capacity before the step-four determination and to consider all of the claimant’s impairments, including those that are not severe.

(SS) Pennington v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2024-02-06(e)

Before making the step four determination, the ALJ first must determine the claimant’s RFC. 20 C.F.R. § 416.920(e); Nowden v. Berryhill, No. EDCV 17-00584-JEM, 2018 WL 1155971, at *2 (C.D. Cal. Mar. 2, 2018). The RFC is “the most [one] can still do despite [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 RFC must consider all of the claimant’s impairments, including those that are not severe. 20 C.F.R. §§ 416.920(e); 416.945(a)(2); Social Security Ruling (“SSR”) 96-8p, available at 1996 WL 374184 (Jul. 2, 1996).

At step four, § 416.920(e) requires the ALJ to determine the claimant’s residual functional capacity by considering all relevant medical and other evidence.

Anton v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2024-02-06(e)

At Step Four, the ALJ must determine a claimant’s RFC by considering all relevant medical and other evidence. 20 C.F.R. § 416.920(e).

Section 416.920(e) requires the ALJ to determine a claimant’s RFC before deciding step four and to account for all impairments, including nonsevere ones, in that assessment.

(SS) Sanchez de Mendoza v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2024-02-09(e)

Before making the step four determinations, the ALJ first must determine the claimant’s RFC. 20 C.F.R. § 416.920(e). The RFC is the most a claimant can still do despite their limitations and represents an assessment based on all relevant evidence. 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1545(a)(1); 416.945(a)(1)). The RFC must consider all of the claimant’s impairments, including those that are not severe. 20 C.F.R. § 416.920(e); § 416.945(a)(2).

Section 416.920(e) requires the ALJ to determine the claimant’s residual functional capacity before making the step-four determination and to consider all of the claimant’s impairments, including non-severe impairments, in assessing that capacity.

(SS) Casillas De Magana v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2024-02-29(e)

Before making the step four determinations, the ALJ first must determine the claimant’s RFC. 20 C.F.R. § 416.920(e). The RFC is the most a claimant can still do despite their limitations and represents an assessment based on all relevant evidence. 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1545(a)(1); 416.945(a)(1)). The RFC must consider all of the claimant’s impairments, including those that are not severe. 20 C.F.R. § 416.920(e); § 416.945(a)(2).

At step four, § 416.920(e) requires the ALJ to determine the claimant’s residual functional capacity while considering all of the claimant’s impairments, including impairments that are not severe.

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

Before making the step four determinations, the ALJ first must determine the claimant’s RFC. 20 C.F.R. § 416.920(e). The RFC is the most a claimant can still do despite their limitations and represents an assessment based on all relevant evidence. 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1545(a)(1), 416.945(a)(1). The RFC must consider all of the claimant’s impairments, including those that are not severe. 20 C.F.R. §§ 416.920(e), 416.945(a)(2).

Section 416.920(e) requires the ALJ to account for the total limiting effects of medically determinable impairments and the claimant’s subjective pain experiences when assessing residual functional capacity.

(SS) King v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2024-03-25(e)

The ALJ must consider a claimant’s physical and mental abilities, § 416.920(b) and (c), as well as the total limiting effects caused by medically determinable impairments and the claimant’s subjective experiences of pain, § 416.920(e).

Section 416.920(e) requires the ALJ to assess a claimant’s residual functional capacity before deciding whether the claimant can perform past relevant work, considering all impairments, including non-severe impairments.

(SS) Wagner v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2024-03-27(e)

Before making the step four determinations, the ALJ first must determine the claimant’s RFC. 20 C.F.R. § 416.920(e). The RFC is the most a claimant can still do despite their limitations and represents an assessment based on all relevant evidence. 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1545(a)(1); 416.945(a)(1)). The RFC must consider all of the claimant’s impairments, including those that are not severe. 20 C.F.R. § 416.920(e); § 416.945(a)(2). ... Thus, it was appropriate for the ALJ to not include bradycardic fatigue in Plaintiff’s RFC. ... Therefore, the Court finds no legal error in the ALJ’s formulation of Plaintiff's RFC without inclusion of additional limitations to reflect Plaintiff’s fatigue.

Section 416.920(e) requires the ALJ to assess the claimant’s residual functional capacity before steps four and five, accounting for all impairments, including nonsevere impairments.

(SS) Moreno v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2024-03-29(e)

The RFC must consider all of the claimant’s impairments, including those that are not severe. 20 C.F.R. §§ 416.920(e), 416.945(a)(2); Social Security Ruling (“SSR”) 96–8p.

Before determining whether a claimant can perform past relevant work, the ALJ must assess residual functional capacity by considering all medically determinable impairments, including those that are not severe.

(SS) Goltz v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2024-03-27(e)

Before making the step four determination, the ALJ first must determine the claimant’s RFC. 20 C.F.R. § 416.920(e); Nowden v. Berryhill, No. EDCV 17-00584-JEM, 2018 WL 1155971, at *2 (C.D. Cal. Mar. 2, 2018). The RFC is “the most [one] can still do despite [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 RFC must consider all of the claimant’s impairments, including those that are not severe. 20 C.F.R. §§ 416.920(e); 416.945(a)(2); Social Security Ruling (“SSR”) 96-8p, available at 1996 WL 374184 (Jul. 2, 1996).

Section 416.920(e) requires the residual functional capacity assessment to occur between steps three and four of the five-step disability evaluation.

Chang v. O'Malley · filed 2024-06-28(e)

When applied correctly, an ALJ assesses a claimant’s RFC between steps three and four of the five-step evaluation process.

Section 416.920(e) requires the ALJ to determine a claimant’s residual functional capacity before step four and to account for all of the claimant’s impairments, including nonsevere impairments, in that assessment.

(SS) Nichols v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2024-08-26(e)

Before making the step four determination, the ALJ first must determine the claimant’s RFC. 20 C.F.R. § 416.920(e); Nowden v. Berryhill, No. EDCV 17-00584-JEM, 2018 WL 1155971, at *2 (C.D. Cal. Mar. 2, 2018). The RFC is “the most [one] can still do despite [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 RFC must consider all of the claimant’s impairments, including those that are not severe. 20 C.F.R. §§ 416.920(e); 416.945(a)(2); Social Security Ruling (“SSR”) 96-8p, available at 1996 WL 374184 (Jul. 2, 1996).

Section 416.920(e) requires the residual functional capacity assessment to account for all of a claimant’s impairments, including impairments that are not severe.

(SS) Alvarez Marin v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2024-08-16(e)

The RFC must consider all of the claimant’s impairments, including those that are not severe. 20 C.F.R. §§ 416.920(e); 416.945(a)(2); Social Security Ruling (“SSR”) 96-8p, available at 1996 WL 374184 (Jul. 2, 1996).

Section 416.920(e) requires an ALJ to determine the claimant’s residual functional capacity before making the step-four determination; the RFC must account for all impairments, including non-severe impairments.

(SS) Fane v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2024-10-03(e)

Before making the step four determination, the ALJ first must determine the claimant’s RFC. 20 C.F.R. § 416.920(e); Nowden v. Berryhill, No. EDCV 17-00584-JEM, 2018 WL 1155971, at *2 (C.D. Cal. Mar. 2, 2018). The RFC is “the most [one] can still do despite [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 RFC must consider all of the claimant’s impairments, including those that are not severe. 20 C.F.R. §§ 416.920(e); 416.945(a)(2); Social Security Ruling (“SSR”) 96-8p, available at 1996 WL 374184 (Jul. 2, 1996).

Section 416.920(e) requires the ALJ to assess a claimant’s residual functional capacity after the step-three evaluation, but a mild limitation identified in the paragraph-B analysis need not automatically be included in the RFC.

(SS) Beyer v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2024-11-12(e)

Before proceeding to step four, the ALJ must first determine the claimant’s residual functional capacity. ... The RFC must consider all of the claimant’s impairments, including those that are not severe. 20 C.F.R. §§ 416.920(e), 416.945(a)(2); Social Security Ruling (“SSR”) 96–8p. ... Simply put, there is no requirement that mild limitations be incorporated into the RFC.

Section 416.920(e) requires the ALJ to assess residual functional capacity before step four and account for all of the claimant’s impairments, including non-severe impairments.

(SS) Ingram v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2024-12-06(e)

The RFC must consider all of the claimant’s impairments, including those that are not severe. 20 C.F.R. §§ 416.920(e), 416.945(a)(2); Social Security Ruling (“SSR”) 96–8p.

At the residual-functional-capacity stage, the ALJ must consider all of the claimant's impairments, including impairments that are not severe.

(SS) Galvan v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2024-12-09(e)

Before proceeding to step four, the ALJ must first determine the claimant’s residual functional capacity. ... The RFC must consider all of the claimant’s impairments, including those that are not severe. 20 C.F.R. §§ 416.920(e), 416.945(a)(2); Social Security Ruling (“SSR”) 96–8p.

Section 416.920(e) requires the ALJ to determine a claimant’s residual functional capacity before making the step-four determination.

(SS) Campbell v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2025-01-17(e)

Before making the step four determination, the ALJ first must determine the claimant’s RFC. 20 C.F.R. § 416.920(e).

Section 416.920(e) requires the ALJ’s residual functional capacity assessment to consider all of a claimant’s impairments, including impairments that are not severe.

(SS) Cruz v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2025-03-06(e)

The RFC must consider all the claimant’s impairments, severe or not. 20 C.F.R. §§ 416.920(e), 416.945(a)(2).

Section 416.920(e) requires the Commissioner to assess a claimant’s residual functional capacity after step three and use that assessment at steps four and five.

Hill v. Social Security Administration, Commissioner of · filed 2025-04-29(e)

The Commissioner uses the familiar five-step sequential process to evaluate a claim for disability. 20 C.F.R. § 416.920; ... After evaluating step three, the Commissioner assesses claimant’s residual functional capacity (RFC). 20 C.F.R. § 416.920(e). This assessment is used at both step four and step five of the sequential evaluation process. Id.

Section 416.920(e) requires an ALJ to assess a claimant’s residual functional capacity before deciding whether the claimant can perform past relevant work at step four.

(SS) Castaneda v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2025-06-03(e)

Before making the step four determination, the ALJ first must determine the claimant’s RFC. 20 C.F.R. § 416.920(e). 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 RFC must consider all the claimant’s impairments, including those that are not severe. 20 C.F.R. §§ 416.920(e); 416.945(a)(2); Social Security Ruling (“SSR”) 96-8p, 1996 WL 374184 (July 2, 1996).

Section 416.920(e) requires the ALJ to consider all of a claimant’s impairments, severe and non-severe, when determining residual functional capacity.

(SS) Rogers v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2025-06-12(e)

Before proceeding to steps four and five, the ALJ determines the claimant’s residual functional capacity (RFC) which 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. § 416.945(a)(1). The RFC must consider all of the claimant’s impairments, severe or not. 20 C.F.R. §§ 416.920(e), 416.945(a)(2).

Section 416.920(e) requires the ALJ to assess residual functional capacity before deciding step four, including considering whether mild mental limitations found at step two affect that capacity.

Vega v. Colvin · filed 2025-08-04(e)

Before making the step four determination, the ALJ must pause to assess the claimant’s Residual Functional Capacity (“RFC”). 20 C.F.R. §§ 416.920(e), 404.1520(e). ... Thus, the Court concludes that the ALJ should have considered whether Plaintiff’s mild mental limitations assessed at step two should be reflected in Plaintiff’s RFC.

Section 416.920(e) requires the ALJ to determine the claimant’s residual functional capacity before step four and to assess it based on all relevant evidence, including nonsevere impairments.

(SS) Selzer v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2025-08-11(e)

Before making the step four determination, the ALJ first must determine the claimant’s RFC. 20 C.F.R. § 416.920(e). 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 RFC must consider all the claimant’s impairments, including those that are not severe. 20 C.F.R. §§ 416.920(e); 416.945(a)(2); Social Security Ruling (“SSR”) 96-8p, 1996 WL 374184 (July 2, 1996).

Section 416.920(e) requires the ALJ to assess a claimant’s residual functional capacity before deciding whether the claimant can perform past relevant work at step four.

(SS) Warren v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2025-08-28(e)

Before making the step four determination, the ALJ first must determine the claimant’s RFC. 20 C.F.R. § 416.920(e). ... The Court finds the lack of a medical opinion that included consideration of the new raw medical data, coupled with the fact that the ALJ knew Plaintiff was receiving additional studies and testing related to Plaintiff’s pulmonary functioning, triggered the ALJ’s duty to further develop the record.

Section 416.920(e) requires the ALJ at step four to determine a claimant’s residual functional capacity by considering all relevant medical and other evidence.

Venable · filed 2025-11-10(e)

At step four, the ALJ must determine a claimant’s RFC by considering all relevant medical and other evidence. 20 C.F.R. § 416.920(e).

Section 416.920(e) requires the ALJ to determine a claimant’s residual functional capacity before deciding whether the claimant can perform past relevant work at step four.

Bradford v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2026-01-06(e)

Before making the step four determination, the ALJ first must determine the claimant’s RFC. 20 C.F.R. § 416.920(e).

Section 416.920(e) requires the ALJ to determine a claimant’s residual functional capacity by considering all relevant medical and other evidence before proceeding to step four.

Ronau · filed 2026-04-27(e)

Before proceeding to step four, the ALJ must determine a claimant’s RFC by considering all relevant medical and other evidence. 20 C.F.R. § 416.920(e).

Section 416.920(e) requires the residual functional capacity assessment to account for all of a claimant’s impairments, including impairments that are not severe, before the evaluation proceeds to steps four and five.

(SS) Vega v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2024-03-11(e)

The RFC must consider all of the claimant’s impairments, including those that are not severe. 20 C.F.R. §§ 416.920(e), 416.945(a)(2); Social Security Ruling (“SSR”) 96–8p.

Section 416.920(e) requires the ALJ, at step four, to determine the claimant's residual functional capacity using all relevant medical and other evidence.

Echevarria · filed 2025-12-03(e)

At step four, the ALJ must determine a claimant’s RFC by considering all relevant medical and other evidence. 20 C.F.R. § 416.920(e).

Section 416.920(e) requires the residual functional capacity assessment to consider all of a claimant’s impairments, including those that are not severe.

(SS) Jacobson v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2023-03-22(e)

The RFC must consider all of the claimant’s impairments, including those that are not severe.

Section 416.920(e) requires the ALJ to account in the residual functional capacity for a moderate social interaction limitation found at step three.

(SS)Ramirez v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2023-07-07(e)

Having made that finding at step three, the ALJ was required to incorporate the limitation in the RFC.

Section 416.920(a)(3) requires an ALJ to consider lay statements about a claimant’s symptoms when deciding disability.

Kobernic · filed 2025-10-14(a)(3)

But while the ALJ need not utilize the medical-opinion articulation requirements when considering evidence from nonmedical sources, the regulations do not state that the ALJ is not required to consider lay statements.

Section 416.920 requires an ALJ to consider evidence of chronic pain syndrome from step two throughout the five-step disability evaluation.

Stalder v. Dudek · filed 2025-02-28(a)(3)

The ALJ erred in failing to consider Stalder’s chronic pain syndrome beginning at step two and throughout the five-step sequential disability evaluation.

Section 416.920(e) requires the ALJ to determine a claimant’s residual functional capacity before making the step-four determination.

(SS) Warecki v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2022-07-22(e)

Before making the step four determination, the ALJ first must determine the claimant’s RFC.

Section 416.920(e) requires the ALJ to determine the claimant’s residual functional capacity before making the step-four determination.

(SS) Gomez v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2022-06-03(e)

Before making the step four determination, the ALJ first must determine the claimant’s RFC.

Section 416.920(e) requires the ALJ at Step Four to determine the claimant’s residual functional capacity after considering all medical and other evidence in the record.

Glenn v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2022-05-19(e)

At Step Four of the sequential evaluation process, the ALJ must determine a claimant’s RFC after considering all the medical and other evidence in the record. 20 C.F.R. § 416.920(e).

Section 416.920(b) requires consideration of all evidence relevant to the disability claim, including evidence predating the application or alleged onset date.

Smith v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2019-08-30(b)

Furthermore, Social Security’s own regulation states that “we review all of the evidence relevant to your claim.” 20 C.F.R. § 416.920(b). The regulation does not say that the evidence is from the date after a person files or a date after they allege disability. To limit evidence, as the Commissioner suggests, would mean that claimants with progressive diseases or long-term medical issues would not have evidence considered.

Section 416.920(a)(3) requires an ALJ to consider all evidence in the record when deciding whether a claimant is eligible for benefits.

Dodge v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2019-11-20(a)(3)

An ALJ must consider “all evidence” in the record before making a determination as to whether a claimant is eligible for benefits. 20 C.F.R. § 416.920(a)(3).

Section 416.920(a)(3) requires an ALJ to consider all evidence in the case record, including evidence from all medical sources, when determining disability.

George v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2019-12-04(a)(3)

The Regulations require an ALJ to consider all evidence in the case record, including evidence from all medical sources. 20 C.F.R. § 416.920(a)(3), 416.929(f).

At step two, an impairment is severe only if it significantly limits a claimant’s physical or mental ability to do basic work activities, and the claimant bears the burden of proving a medically determinable impairment that meets that standard.

Luz R v. Saul · filed 2020-03-03(c), (a)(4)(ii)

At Step 2, an impairment is considered “severe” when it significantly limits a claimant’s physical or mental ability to do basic work activities. 20 C.F.R. § 416.920(c). ... An ALJ may properly base his Step 2 finding on the absence of medical evidence supporting a finding that a claimant suffers from a “severe medically determinable physical or mental impairment” which “significantly limits” her physical or mental ability to do basic work activities. 20 C.F.R. § 416.920(a)(4)(ii), (c). ... At Step 2, Plaintiff bore the burden of demonstrating that she had a “medically determinable” physical or mental impairment(s) that significantly limited her ability to do basic work activity at the relevant time. Id. The ALJ found that Plaintiff did not meet that burden as to her physical issues, and Plaintiff has shown no error in his findings.

Section 416.920(a)(3) requires an ALJ to consider all evidence in the case record when deciding whether a claimant is disabled.

Craig v. Commissioner of Social Security Administration · filed 2020-03-09(a)(3)

Further, it would be error for the ALJ not to acknowledge medical evidence predating the onset date because 20 C.F.R. § 416.920(a)(3) requires the ALJ to “consider all evidence in [the] case record when [she] makes a determination or decision whether [claimant is] disabled” and the ALJ must “discuss the significantly probative evidence he rejects.”

At step two, an impairment is severe only if it significantly limits basic work activities, and the ALJ may find no severe impairment when medical evidence does not establish a severe medically determinable impairment.

Leonard P. v. Saul · filed 2020-03-12(c), (a)(4)(ii)

At Step 2, an impairment is considered “severe” when it significantly limits a claimant’s physical or mental ability to do basic work activities. 20 C.F.R. § 416.920(c). ... An ALJ may properly base his Step 2 finding on the absence of medical evidence supporting a finding that a claimant suffers from a “severe medically determinable physical or mental impairment” which “significantly limits” her physical or mental ability to do basic work activities. 20 C.F.R. § 416.920(a)(4)(ii), (c).

Section 416.920(a)(3) requires the decisionmaker to consider all evidence in the claimant’s case record.

Stretch v. Commissioner of Social Security Administration · filed 2020-07-06(a)(3)

... see also 20 C.F.R. § 416.920(a)(3) (“We will consider all evidence in your case record. . . .”). Here, Dr. Kahoe found Plaintiff had severely limited attention and concentration skills and deficits in both short- and long-term memory. AR 405. Dr. Kahoe also summarized the results of assessments supporting his findings. Id. Such evidence is probative as it relates to the limiting effects of Plaintiff’s mental impairments. As such, the ALJ should have addressed the evidence in the decision and erred by failing to do so.

Section 416.920(a)(3) requires the Commissioner to consider all evidence in the case record, including evidence from before the alleged disability onset date.

Wheeler v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2020-07-15(a)(3)

Further, “it is within the ALJ’s purview to consider pre-onset date evidence.” James N. v. Comm’r of Soc. Sec., No. 3:18-CV-1324 (CFH), 2020 WL 1140498, at *5 (N.D.N.Y. Mar. 6, 2020); see 20 C.F.R. § 416.920(a)(3) (“We will consider all evidence in your case record... .”). ... This evidence indicates that, during brief periods of sobriety, plaintiff's mental limitations improved and, although the evidence the ALJ relied on pre-dated the alleged onset date, the ALJ appropriately considered it in reaching his materiality determination.

Section 416.920(a)(3) requires an ALJ to consider all evidence in the record when making a disability determination.

Watson v. Saul, Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2020-11-16(a)(3)

ALJs must consider all evidence in the record when making disability determinations. 42 U.S.C. §§ 423(d)(5)(B), 1382c(a)(3)(H)(i); 20 C.F.R. § 416.920(a)(3); see 20 C.F.R. § 416.920b. While an ALJ need not specifically reference every piece of evidence in his decision, an ALJ’s “bare recital that he considered the evidence” does not discharge his duty to base his decision on substantial evidence.

Section 416.920(a)(3) requires an ALJ to consider all evidence in the case record when deciding whether a claimant is disabled.

Kelley v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2020-12-22(a)(3)

The ALJ discounted these observations because Dr. Korgeski did not offer a definitive diagnosis. This was error. See 20 C.F.R. § 416.920(a)(3) (requiring an ALJ to consider “all evidence in your case record when we make a determination or decision whether you are disabled.”); Lopez v. Sec'y of Dep't of Health & Human Servs., 728 F.2d 148, 150-51 (2d Cir. 1984) (holding that a decision should be remanded “when it appears that the ALJ has failed to consider relevant and probative evidence which is available to him.”).

Section 416.920(a)(3) requires the ALJ to consider all evidence in the record when formulating a claimant's residual functional capacity.

Shroyer v. Saul · filed 2021-01-19(a)(3)

In formulating a claimant’s RFC, the ALJ must consider all the evidence in the record. 42 U.S.C. §§ 423(d)(5)(B), 1382c(a)(3)(H)(i); 20 C.F.R. § 416.920(a)(3); see 20 C.F.R. § 416.920b.

Section 416.920(a)(3) requires the ALJ to consider all evidence in the claimant’s case record when evaluating a disability claim.

Davis v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2021-09-03(a)(3)

When evaluating a claim, the ALJ considers all evidence in the claimant’s case record. 20 C.F.R. § 416.920(a)(3). ... The ALJ thus properly considered evidence in the medical record, both during and after Plaintiff’s incarceration, that contradicts Plaintiff’s symptom testimony, including evidence regarding Plaintiff’s mental health treatment history. See Carmickle, 533 F.3d at 1161 (“Contradiction with the medical record is a sufficient basis for rejecting a claimant’s subjective testimony.”).

Section 416.920(a)(3) requires the ALJ to consider all evidence, including medical opinions, when determining whether a claimant is disabled.

Romano v. Saul · filed 2022-03-18(a)(3)

An ALJ must consider all evidence, including medical opinions, in determining whether the claimant is disabled. See 20 C.F.R. § 416.920(a)(3).

Section 416.920(a)(3) requires the ALJ to consider all evidence when determining whether a claimant is disabled.

Flores, Jr. v. Kijakazi · filed 2022-04-19(a)(3)

Consistent with these regulations, the ALJ carefully reviewed the medical evidence and plaintiff’s testimony. See 20 C.F.R. § 416.920(a)(3) (ALJ must consider all evidence in determining whether the claimant is disabled).

Section 416.920(a)(3) requires an ALJ to consider all evidence, including medical opinions, when determining whether a claimant is disabled.

Ainab v. Kijakazi · filed 2022-05-10(a)(3)

An ALJ must consider all evidence, including medical opinions, in determining whether the claimant is disabled. See 20 C.F.R. § 416.920(a)(3).

Section 416.920(a)(3) requires the ALJ to consider all evidence in the record when determining disability.

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

The ALJ is required to consider all the evidence in the record when making a disability determination. See 20 C.F.R. § 416.920(a)(3).

Section 416.920(a)(3) requires the ALJ to consider all evidence in the record when making a disability determination.

Cockey v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2025-07-22(a)(3)

ALJs must consider all evidence in the record when making disability determinations. 20 C.F.R. § 416.920(a)(3); see 20 C.F.R. § 416.920b.

Section 416.920(a)(4)(iii) requires the ALJ at step three to decide whether the claimant's impairment meets or equals a listed impairment and satisfies the durational requirements, with the claimant required to establish all specified criteria.

Keller v. Kijakazi · filed 2023-09-19(a)(4)(iii)

At step-three of the five-step inquiry the ALJ is required to determine whether a claimant’s medical impairment “meets or equals” one of the impairments listings (“Listings”) itemized in Appendix 1 to subpart P of Part 404 of the Social Security Regulations and meets the durational requirements to qualify as a disability. 20 C.F.R. § 416.920(a)(4)(iii).

At step three, the claimant is found disabled if the impairment meets or medically equals a listed impairment, and the claimant bears the burden of proving that it does.

Hanna v. Berryhill · filed 2019-10-21(a)(4)(iii)

Social Security regulations provide that a claimant is disabled if he or she meets or medically equals a listed impairment. 20 C.F.R. § 416.920(a)(4)(iii) (“If you have an impairment that meets or equals one of listings . . . we will find that you are disabled”); 20 C.F.R. § 416.920(d) (“If you have an impairment(s) which . . . is listed in Appendix 1 or is equal to a listed impairment(s), we will find you disabled without considering your age, education, and work experience”).

At step three, the claimant must provide evidence showing that the impairments meet or medically equal a listed impairment.

Innocent v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2020-03-03(a)(4)(iii)

In the third step of the analysis to determine a claimant’s entitlement to social security benefits, it is the claimant’s burden to bring forth evidence to establish that his impairments meet or are medically equivalent to a listed impairment. See 20 C.F.R. §§ 416.920(a)(4)(iii) & 404.1520(a)(4)(iii); Evans v. Sec’y of Health & Human Servs., 820 F.2d 161, 164 (6th Cir. 1987).

Section 416.920(a)(iii) and (d) require the Commissioner at Step 3 to determine whether a claimant’s impairments meet or equal a listed impairment; if they do, the claimant is disabled without proceeding to later steps, and the claimant bears the burden of proof.

COULOMBE v. SOCIAL SECURITY ADMINISTRATION COMMISSIONER · filed 2020-08-31(a)(iii), (d)

At Step 3 of the sequential evaluation process, the Commissioner considers whether a claimant’s impairments meet or equal the criteria set forth in the “listings” found in appendix 1 of the disability regulations. 20 C.F.R. § 416.920(a)(iii). If so, the claimant is deemed disabled without any further analysis of the claimant’s residual functional capacity to perform past relevant work or other work in the national economy. Id., § 416.920(d); ... At Step 3, the claimant bears the burden of proving that her impairment or combination of impairments meets or equals a listing. 20 C.F.R. § 416.920(d); ... The ALJ’s discussion of Listing 1.04 was adequate to support his finding. Plaintiff cannot establish on this record that she meets all the requirements of a listing.

At step three, the adjudicator need consider only listings relevant to impairments supported as severe by substantial evidence.

Hilkemeyer v. Barnhart · filed 2004-08-26(a)(4)(iii)

Because the ALJ's determination that Hilkemeyer's only severe impairment was an affective disorder is supported by substantial evidence, the only relevant listing at step three of the analysis was Listing 12.04.

Section 416.920(e) requires the ALJ to determine a claimant’s residual functional capacity from all record evidence before evaluating the claimant’s work capacity at steps four and five.

Bradbury v. Berryhill · filed 2020-08-18(e)

If the claimant’s impairment does not meet or equal one of the listed impairments, before proceeding to the fourth step, the ALJ is to make a residual functional capacity determination based on all the evidence in the record; this determination is used to evaluate the claimant’s work capacity for steps four and five. 20 C.F.R. § 416.920(e).

Section 416.920(e) requires the ALJ to consider all of a claimant’s medically determinable impairments, severe and non-severe, when assessing residual functional capacity.

Bass v. Berryhill · filed 2020-03-31(e)

In addition, when assessing a claimant’s RFC, an ALJ must consider all of the claimant’s medically determinable impairments, both severe and non-severe. ... Where the ALJ finds at least one severe impairment at step two, and properly considers all medically determinable impairments at step four, failing to find that any specific impairment is severe is harmless error. ... However, if an ALJ does not consider all medically determinable impairments when assessing a claimant’s RFC, then an error at step two is not harmless.

At the RFC stage, the ALJ must consider all medically determinable impairments, including those that are not severe.

Sorian v. Berryhill · filed 2020-05-28(e)

In addition, when assessing a claimant’s RFC, an ALJ must consider all of the claimant’s medically determinable impairments, both severe and non-severe. 20 C.F.R. §§ 416.920(e), 416.945; see Carmickle v. Comm’r, Soc. Sec. Admin., 533 F.3d 1155, 1164 (9th Cir. 2008); see also SSR 96-8p, 1996 WL 374184, at *5 (“In assessing RFC, the adjudicator must consider limitations and restrictions imposed by all of an individual’s impairments [because] limitations due to such a ‘not severe’ impairment may prevent an individual from performing past relevant work or may narrow the range of other work that the individual may still be able to do.”).

At the RFC stage, the ALJ must consider all of the claimant’s impairments, including impairments that are not severe.

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

The RFC must consider all of the claimant’s impairments, including those that are not severe. 20 C.F.R. §§ 416.920(e), 416.945(a)(2); Social Security Ruling (“SSR”) 96–8p.

Section 416.920(e) requires the Commissioner to consider all relevant medical and other evidence in the claimant’s record when determining residual functional capacity.

PETERSON v. COMMISSIONER OF SOCIAL SECURITY · filed 2021-04-30(e)

In considering a claimant’s RFC, the Commissioner must consider “all the relevant medical and other evidence” in the claimant’s record. 20 C.F.R. § 416.920(e).

Section 416.920(e) requires the residual functional capacity assessment to consider all of a claimant’s impairments, including impairments that are not severe.

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

The RFC must consider all of the claimant’s impairments, including those that are not severe. 20 C.F.R. §§ 416.920(e), 416.945(a)(2); Social Security Ruling (“SSR”) 96–8p.

Section 416.920(e) requires the ALJ to determine the claimant’s residual functional capacity before step four and to account for all impairments, including nonsevere impairments, based on all relevant evidence.

Grindey v. Saul · filed 2021-07-15(e)

Before making the step four determination, the ALJ first must determine the claimant’s residual functional capacity (RFC). 20 C.F.R. § 416.920(e). 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 RFC must consider all of the claimant’s impairments, including those that are not severe. 20 C.F.R. §§ 416.920(e), 416.945(a)(2); Social Security Ruling (“SSR”) 96-8p.

Section 416.920(e) requires an RFC assessment after a severe impairment is found, and the RFC must account for all of the claimant’s impairments, including non-severe impairments.

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

Before proceeding to step four, the ALJ must first determine the claimant’s residual functional capacity. Nowden v. Berryhill, No. EDCV 17-00584-JEM, 2018 WL 1155971, at *2 (C.D. Cal. Mar. 2, 2018). 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 RFC must consider all of the claimant’s impairments, including those that are not severe. 20 C.F.R. §§ 416.920(e), 416.945(a)(2); Social Security Ruling (“SSR”) 96–8p.

At step four, the decision-maker must consider all of a claimant’s impairments, including non-severe impairments, when assessing residual functional capacity.

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

The RFC must consider all of the claimant’s impairments, including those that are not severe. 20 C.F.R. §§ 416.920(e), 416.945(a)(2); Social Security Ruling (“SSR”) 96–8p.

At the residual-functional-capacity stage, the ALJ must consider all of the claimant’s impairments, including impairments that are not severe.

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

The RFC must consider all of the claimant’s impairments, including those that are not severe. 20 C.F.R. §§ 416.920(e), 416.945(a)(2); Social Security Ruling (“SSR”) 96–8p.

Section 416.920(e) requires the RFC assessment to account for all of a claimant’s impairments, including impairments that are nonsevere or do not meet a listed impairment.

Anderson v. Commissioner of Social Security Administration · filed 2022-02-09(e)

The RFC must account for all of the claimant’s impairments, including those that are not severe or fail to meet a listed impairment. 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1520(e), 416.920(e), 404.1545(a)(2), 416.945(a)(2); SSR 96-8P, 61 Fed. Reg. 34,474, 34,475 (July 2, 1996). ... On the facts presented here, the court finds that the ALJ erred when he omitted from his RFC assessment a limitation that reflects his finding of Plaintiff’s mild mental impairments and failed to state why any such limitation is not necessary.

Section 416.920(e) requires the residual functional capacity assessment to consider all of a claimant’s impairments, including impairments that are not severe.

(SS) Shank v. Commissioner Social Security · filed 2022-07-07(e)

The RFC must consider all of the claimant’s impairments, including those that are not severe. 20 C.F.R. §§ 416.920(e), 416.945(a)(2); Social Security Ruling (“SSR”) 96–8p.

Section 416.920(e) requires the RFC assessment to consider all of a claimant’s impairments, including impairments that are not severe.

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

The RFC must consider all of the claimant’s impairments, including those that are not severe. 20 C.F.R. §§ 416.920(e), 416.945(a)(2); Social Security Ruling (“SSR”) 96–8p.

Section 416.920(e) requires the residual functional capacity assessment to consider all of a claimant’s impairments, including impairments that are not severe.

(SS) Aguilera v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2023-03-07(e)

Before proceeding to step four, the ALJ must first determine the claimant’s residual functional capacity. ... 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 RFC must consider all of the claimant’s impairments, including those that are not severe. 20 C.F.R. §§ 416.920(e), 416.945(a)(2); Social Security Ruling (“SSR”) 96–8p.

At the RFC stage, the regulation requires consideration of all of a claimant’s impairments, including impairments that are not severe.

(SS) Cooper v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2023-03-14(e)

The RFC must consider all of the claimant’s impairments, including those that are not severe. 20 C.F.R. §§ 416.920(e), 416.945(a)(2); Social Security Ruling (“SSR”) 96–8p.

Section 416.920(e) requires the residual functional capacity assessment to consider all of the claimant’s impairments, including impairments that are not severe.

(SS) Jimenez v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2023-04-27(e)

The RFC must consider all of the claimant’s impairments, including those that are not severe. 20 C.F.R. §§ 416.920(e), 416.945(a)(2); Social Security Ruling (“SSR”) 96–8p.

Section 416.920(e) requires the residual functional capacity assessment to consider all of a claimant’s impairments, including impairments that are not severe.

(SS) Marquez v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2023-05-15(e)

The RFC must consider all of the claimant’s impairments, including those that are not severe. 20 C.F.R. §§ 416.920(e), 416.945(a)(2); Social Security Ruling (“SSR”) 96–8p.

Section 416.920(e) requires the ALJ to consider all of a claimant’s impairments, including impairments that are not severe, when assessing residual functional capacity.

(SS) Barney v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2023-05-22(e)

The RFC must consider all of the claimant’s impairments, including those that are not severe. 20 C.F.R. §§ 416.920(e), 416.945(a)(2); Social Security Ruling (“SSR”) 96–8p.

Section 416.920(e) requires the ALJ to determine the claimant’s residual functional capacity before step four and to consider all of the claimant’s impairments, including non-severe impairments, in that assessment.

(SS)Her v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2023-06-08(e)

Before making the step four determination, the ALJ first must determine the claimant’s RFC. 20 C.F.R. § 416.920(e); Nowden v. Berryhill, No. EDCV 17-00584-JEM, 2018 WL 1155971, at *2 (C.D. Cal. Mar. 2, 2018). The RFC is “the most [one] can still do despite [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 RFC must consider all of the claimant’s impairments, including those that are not severe. 20 C.F.R. §§ 416.920(e); 416.945(a)(2); Social Security Ruling (“SSR”) 96-8p, available at 1996 WL 374184 (Jul. 2, 1996).

Section 416.920(e) requires the ALJ to determine the claimant’s residual functional capacity before step four and to consider all of the claimant’s impairments, including nonsevere impairments, in that assessment.

(SS) Garcia v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2023-06-23(e)

Before making the step four determination, the ALJ first must determine the claimant’s RFC. 20 C.F.R. § 416.920(e); Nowden v. Berryhill, No. EDCV 17-00584-JEM, 2018 WL 1155971, at *2 (C.D. Cal. Mar. 2, 2018). ... The RFC must consider all of the claimant’s impairments, including those that are not severe. 20 C.F.R. §§ 416.920(e), 416.945(a)(2); Social Security Ruling (“SSR”) 96-8p, available at 1996 WL 374184 (Jul. 2, 1996).

Section 416.920(e) requires the ALJ to assess residual functional capacity by considering all of the claimant’s medically determinable impairments, including impairments that are not severe.

(SS) Araiza v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2023-09-28(e)

The RFC must consider all of the claimant’s impairments, including those that are not severe. 20 C.F.R. § 416.920(e); § 416.945(a)(2).

Section 416.920(e), together with the RFC provision it cites, requires the ALJ to consider all of the claimant’s impairments, including non-severe impairments, when assessing residual functional capacity before step four.

(SS) Schilling v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2024-01-22(e)

The RFC must consider all of the claimant’s impairments, including those that are not severe. 20 C.F.R. §§ 416.920(e), 416.945(a)(2); Social Security Ruling (“SSR”) 96–8p.

Section 416.920(e) requires the ALJ to determine a claimant’s residual functional capacity before step four and to consider all impairments, including non-severe impairments, in making that determination.

ARENA v. COMMISSIONER OF SOCIAL SECURITY · filed 2024-03-05(e)

Before considering step four of the sequential evaluation process, the ALJ must first determine the claimant’s RFC. 20 C.F.R. §§ 416.920(e), 404.1520(a)(4)(iv). In doing so, the ALJ must consider all of the claimant’s impairments, including impairments that are not severe. 20 C.F.R. §§ 416.920(e), 416.945(a)(2); SSR 96-8p, 61 Fed. Reg. 34474 (Jul. 2, 1996). ... Applying this standard to the present record, the Court finds that the ALJ failed to sufficiently consider and discuss Plaintiff's non-severe mental impairments in making Plaintiffs RFC finding. ... Otherwise, the ALJ’s RFC finding is devoid of any acknowledgment or consideration of Plaintiff's mental impairments. (See id.) As explained by courts in this district, such “passing reference” to Plaintiff's mental limitations, even if found mild and non-severe, is insufficient when determining a plaintiff's RFC.

Section 416.920(e) requires the residual functional capacity assessment to consider all of the claimant’s impairments, including impairments that are not severe.

(SS) Galindo v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2024-03-25(e)

The RFC must consider all of the claimant’s impairments, including those that are not severe. 20 C.F.R. §§ 416.920(e), 416.945(a)(2); Social Security Ruling (“SSR”) 96–8p.

At the residual-functional-capacity stage, the ALJ must consider all of the claimant’s impairments, including impairments that are not severe.

(SS) Stremple v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2024-04-15(e)

The RFC must consider all of the claimant’s impairments, including those that are not severe. 20 C.F.R. §§ 416.920(e), 416.945(a)(2); Social Security Ruling (“SSR”) 96–8p.

At the residual functional capacity stage, the adjudicator must consider all of the claimant’s impairments, including impairments that are not severe.

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

The RFC must consider all of the claimant’s impairments, including those that are not severe. 20 C.F.R. §§ 416.920(e), 416.945(a)(2); Social Security Ruling (“SSR”) 96–8p.

At the RFC stage, the ALJ must consider all of the claimant’s impairments, including those that are not severe.

(SS) Toledo v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2024-06-17(e)

The RFC must consider all of the claimant’s impairments, including those that are not severe. 20 C.F.R. §§ 416.920(e), 416.945(a)(2); Social Security Ruling (“SSR”) 96–8p.

Section 416.920(e) requires the ALJ to determine the claimant’s residual functional capacity before step four and to consider all of the claimant’s impairments, including those that are not severe.

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

Before making the step four determination, the ALJ first must determine the claimant’s RFC. 20 C.F.R. § 416.920(e); Nowden v. Berryhill, No. EDCV 17-00584-JEM, 2018 WL 1155971, at *2 (C.D. Cal. Mar. 2, 2018). ... The RFC must consider all of the claimant’s impairments, including those that are not severe. 20 C.F.R. §§ 416.920(e); 416.945(a)(2); Social Security Ruling (“SSR”) 96-8p, available at 1996 WL 374184 (Jul. 2, 1996).

Section 416.920(e) requires the adjudicator to consider all of a claimant’s impairments, including impairments that are not severe, when assessing residual functional capacity.

(SS) Mcabee v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2024-08-15(e)

The RFC must consider all of the claimant’s impairments, including those that are not severe. 20 C.F.R. §§ 416.920(e), 416.945(a)(2); Social Security Ruling (“SSR”) 96–8p.

At the residual-functional-capacity stage, the ALJ must consider all of the claimant’s impairments, including those found non-severe, and account for any resulting work limitations.

(SS) Rinzel v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2024-09-12(e)

The RFC must consider all of the claimant’s impairments, including those that are not severe. 20 C.F.R. §§ 416.920(e), 416.945(a)(2); Social Security Ruling (“SSR”) 96–8p. ... However, even though the analysis did proceed past the second step, and that the RFC should account for all impairments whether severe or not, does not mean that the RFC did in fact account for urinary incontinence--such as by specifying the number of bathroom breaks needed in addition to, or accommodated by, normal breaks, any need for proximity to a bathroom, and then ultimately inquiring of the Vocational Expert whether such limitations would be work-preclusive.

Section 416.920(e) requires the ALJ to determine the claimant’s residual functional capacity before step four and to consider all medically determinable impairments, including non-severe impairments.

(SS) Desylva v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2024-08-07(e)

Before making the step four determination, the ALJ first must determine the claimant’s RFC. 20 C.F.R. § 416.920(e); Nowden v. Berryhill, No. EDCV 17-00584-JEM, 2018 WL 1155971, at *2 (C.D. Cal. Mar. 2, 2018). The RFC is “the most [one] can still do despite [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 RFC must consider all of the claimant’s impairments, including those that are not severe. 20 C.F.R. §§ 416.920(e); 416.945(a)(2); Social Security Ruling (“SSR”) 96-8p, available at 1996 WL 374184 (Jul. 2, 1996).

At the residual-functional-capacity stage, the ALJ must consider all of the claimant’s impairments, including impairments that are not severe.

(SS) Trede v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2024-11-21(e)

The RFC must consider all of the claimant’s impairments, including those that are not severe. 20 C.F.R. §§ 416.920(e), 416.945(a)(2); Social Security Ruling (“SSR”) 96–8p.

At the residual-functional-capacity stage, § 416.920(e) requires consideration of all medically determinable impairments, including those that are not severe.

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

Even if the ALJ had erred at step two, and he did not, he did not end his disability inquiry there. The ALJ continued to consider Jennifer J.’s depression and anxiety in determining her RFC at step four, acknowledging his obligation to “consider all of the claimant’s impairments, including impairments that are not severe.” (Tr. 26 (citing 20 C.F.R. §§ 416.920(e) and 416.945).) ... Any erroneous conclusion that Jennifer J.’s mental impairments were non-severe was harmless because the ALJ considered them in crafting her RFC.

Section 416.920(e) requires the ALJ, when assessing residual functional capacity, to consider all of the claimant’s impairments, whether severe or not.

(SS) Cardenas v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2025-06-30(e)

The RFC must consider all of the claimant’s impairments, severe or not. 20 C.F.R. §§ 416.920(e), 416.945(a)(2).

At the RFC stage, § 416.920(e) requires the ALJ to consider the functional effects of both severe and non-severe impairments, but does not require explaining how non-severe impairments were considered.

(SS) Gonzalez v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2025-08-04(e)

Residual Functional Capacity must consider all of the claimant’s impairments, whether or not the impairments are severe. 20 C.F.R. §§ 416.920(e), 416.945(a)(2) (emphasis added). “The ALJ can meet this burden by setting out a detailed and thorough summary of the facts and conflicting evidence, stating his interpretation thereof, and making findings.” Magallanes v. Bowen, 881 F.2d 747, 751 (9th Cir. 1989). ... Although it is true that the ALJ must consider the functional effects of both severe and non-severe impairments at the RFC stage, there is no requirement that the ALJ explain or address the consideration of non-severe impairments, which is notable given the regulations do elsewhere indicate when and under what circumstances required “considerations” must be explained. Compare 20 C.F.R. § 416.945(a)(2) (“we will consider all of your medically determinable impairments of which we are aware, including your medically determinable impairments that are not “severe,”’) with 20 C.F.R. § 416.920c(b)(2) ( “we will explain how we considered the supportability and consistency factors . . .” when evaluating opinion evidence) (emphasis added).

At the RFC stage before steps four and five, section 416.920(e) requires the ALJ to account for all of the claimant’s impairments, including those that are not severe.

(SS) Murphy v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2025-08-07(e)

Before proceeding to steps four and five, the ALJ determines the claimant’s residual functional capacity (RFC) which 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. § 416.945(a)(1). The RFC must consider all of the claimant’s impairments, severe or not. 20 C.F.R. §§ 416.920(e), 416.945(a)(2).

Section 416.920(e) requires the ALJ to determine a claimant’s residual functional capacity before step four and to account for all impairments, including non-severe impairments, in that assessment.

(SS) Milan v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2025-08-15(e)

Before making the step four determination, the ALJ first must determine the claimant’s RFC. 20 C.F.R. § 416.920(e). 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 RFC must consider all the claimant’s impairments, including those that are not severe. 20 C.F.R. §§ 416.920(e); 416.945(a)(2); Social Security Ruling (“SSR”) 96-8p, 1996 WL 374184 (July 2, 1996).

Section 416.920(e) requires the ALJ to assess residual functional capacity while considering all of the claimant’s impairments, whether severe or not.

Gonzalez v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2025-10-15(e)

The RFC must consider all of the claimant’s impairments, severe or not. 20 C.F.R. §§ 416.920(e), 416.945(a)(2).

Section 416.920(e) requires an ALJ at step four to determine residual functional capacity by considering all relevant medical and other evidence.

Marquez · filed 2025-10-29(e)

At step four, the ALJ must determine a claimant’s RFC by considering all relevant medical and other evidence. 20 C.F.R. § 416.920(e).

Section 416.920(e) requires the ALJ to consider all of a claimant’s medically determinable impairments, including non-severe impairments, when assessing residual functional capacity.

Radford v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2025-11-25(e)

Before proceeding to steps four and five, the ALJ determines the claimant’s residual functional capacity (RFC) which 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. § 416.945(a)(1). The RFC must consider all of the claimant’s impairments, severe or not. 20 C.F.R. §§ 416.920(e), 416.945(a)(2). ... At the conclusion of the first paragraph quoted above, the ALJ explicitly states, “The undersigned considered all of the claimant’s medically determinable impairments, including those that are not severe, when assessing the claimant’s residual functional capacity.” AR 13 (emphasis added). ... Thus, the ALJ committed no error with respect to Plaintiff’s mild mental limitations.

At the residual-functional-capacity stage, § 416.920(e) requires consideration of all of the claimant’s impairments, including those that are not severe.

Good · filed 2025-12-22(e)

The ALJ’s RFC must consider all of the claimant’s impairments, including those that are not severe. 20 C.F.R. §§ 416.920(e), 416.945(a)(2).

Section 416.920(e) requires the residual functional capacity assessment to consider all of a claimant’s impairments, including those that are not severe.

Paeng See v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2025-12-22(e)

The RFC must consider all of the claimant’s impairments, severe or not. 20 C.F.R. §§ 416.920(e), 416.945(a)(2).

Section 416.920 requires consideration of all impairments throughout the disability evaluation, including impairments found nonsevere.

Foster v. Social Security Administration · filed 2025-06-04(a)

The effects of all impairments should be considered throughout the disability determination, and failure to consider all of Claimant’s impairments is reversible error.

At step two, only medically determinable impairments may be classified as severe or non-severe.

Poler v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2020-04-14(a)(4)(ii)

This is particularly important because by finding that fibromyalgia was not a medically determinable impairment in step two of the sequential analysis, the ALJ had no legal basis upon which to find whether fibromyalgia was severe or non-severe, and as such, was unable to consider Plaintiff's statements about her symptoms and limitations in light of her fibromyalgia diagnosis.

Section 416.920(a)(4)(ii) makes step two a threshold inquiry into whether the claimant has a medically determinable severe impairment, and an omission is harmless when the ALJ proceeds and considers all supported limitations.

Johnston v. Saul · filed 2020-12-15(a)(4)(ii)

At step two of the sequential evaluation process, the ALJ is to identify the claimant’s medically determinable severe impairments. 20 C.F.R. § 416.920(a)(4)(ii). ... Even if Plaintiff is correct that chronic pain syndrome can cause mental limitations and fatigue, any error the ALJ committed in determining Plaintiff’s chronic pain syndrome was not severe was harmless under the circumstances of this case. The step-two determination of severity is “merely a threshold requirement.” ... Where, as here, the ALJ recognizes other severe impairments, he must continue the evaluation process and consider all limitations supported by the evidence. ... That is precisely what the ALJ did here. He considered Plaintiff’s complaints of pain, fatigue, and disability, including evidence bearing on his mental capacity, whether they resulted from chronic pain syndrome or one of the impairments the ALJ identified as severe. Any error in failing to identify chronic pain syndrome as a severe impairment was therefore harmless.

At step two of the disability evaluation, the ALJ must consider whether the claimant’s alleged impairments are medically determinable.

Balsley v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2021-08-19(a)(4)(ii)

At step two, the ALJ must consider whether Plaintiff’s alleged impairments constitute “medically determinable” impairments. See 20 C.F.R. §§ 416.920(a)(4)(ii); 404.1520(a)(4)(ii).

At step two, the regulation requires the ALJ to determine whether the claimant's alleged impairments are medically determinable.

Evans v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2021-08-31(a)(4)(ii)

At step two, the ALJ must consider whether Plaintiff’s alleged impairments constitute “medically determinable” impairments. See 20 C.F.R. §§ 416.920(a)(4)(ii); 404.1520(a)(4)(ii). A medically determinable impairment “must result from anatomical, physiological, or psychological abnormalities which can be shown by medically acceptable clinical and laboratory diagnostic techniques[,]” and “must be established by objective medical evidence from an acceptable medical source . . . not [the claimant’s] statement of symptoms . . . .” 20 C.F.R. § 404.1521. Additionally, an impairment must meet the durational requirement, meaning, “it must have lasted or must be expected to last for a continuous period of at least 12 months.” 20 C.F.R. § 404.1509.

At step two, § 416.920 requires the ALJ to determine whether an impairment or combination of impairments is severe; once any impairment is severe, the claim proceeds, but the ALJ must still consider all resulting limitations in assessing residual functional capacity.

Mullins v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2021-10-28(a)(4)(ii), (c)

At step two, an ALJ considers the severity of a claimant’s impairments. 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1520(a)(4)(ii), 416.920(a)(4)(ii). An impairment or combination of impairments is not severe “if it does not significantly limit [a claimant’s] physical or mental ability to do basic work activities” 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1522(a), 416.922(a). In other words, a severe impairment is an impairment or combination thereof that significantly limits a claimant’s abilities to perform basic work activities. See SSR 85-28, 1985 WL 56856, *4 n.1; 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1520(c), 404.1522(a), 416.920(c), 416.922(a).

At step two, an impairment must be medically determinable based on objective medical evidence before the ALJ evaluates whether it is severe or non-severe.

Haldeman v. Saul · filed 2022-03-17(a)(4)(ii)

At step two of the sequential evaluation process, the ALJ considers whether a claimant’s impairment is (1) medically determinable or non-medically determinable, and (2) severe or non-severe. 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520(a)(4)(ii); 20 C.F.R. § 416.920(a)(4)(ii). This step is essentially a threshold test. To be found medically determinable, an impairment “must result from anatomical, physiological, or psychological abnormalities that can be shown by medically acceptable clinical and laboratory diagnostic techniques.” 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520(a)(4)(ii); 20 C.F.R. § 416.920(a)(4)(ii). This means that to be considered, an impairment must be established by objective medical evidence from an acceptable medical source.

At step two, the ALJ must determine whether the claimant has a medically determinable impairment and whether it is severe.

Gleason v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2022-05-03(a)(4)(ii)

At step two, the ALJ must consider whether Plaintiff’s alleged impairments constitute “medically determinable” impairments. See 20 C.F.R. § 416.920(a)(4)(ii). A medically determinable impairment “must result from anatomical, physiological, or psychological abnormalities which can be shown by medically acceptable clinical and laboratory diagnostic techniques[,]” and “must be established by objective medical evidence from an acceptable medical source.” 20 C.F.R. § 416.921.

At step two, § 416.920 requires the ALJ to determine whether a claimant has a severe impairment, and an error in failing to label one impairment severe is harmless when another impairment is severe and the ALJ considers all limitations later.

Johnson v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2022-08-18(a)(4)(ii)

At step two, an ALJ considers the severity of a claimant’s impairments. 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1520(a)(4)(ii), 416.920(a)(4)(ii). ... With this standard in mind, even if the ALJ should have characterized Plaintiff’s chronic pain syndrome as a severe impairment, any error is harmless because the ALJ characterized other impairments – degenerative disc disease and headaches – as severe. (Tr. 13).

At step two, a finding that an impairment is severe does not by itself require the residual functional capacity assessment to include functional limitations from that impairment.

Robinson v. Commissioner of Social Security Administration · filed 2022-09-12(c)

Ms. Robinson’s argument misstates the relationship between the ALJ’s Step Two findings and the determination of a claimant’s RFC. A determination that an impairment is “severe” at Step Two means only that the impairment has “more than a minimal effect” on the claimant's ability to do basic work activities. ... But a finding that an impairment is “severe” at Step Two does not mandate a finding that there are functional limitations stemming from that impairment.

Section 416.920(a)(4)(ii) requires the ALJ at step two to consider whether the claimant’s alleged impairments are medically determinable impairments.

Houle v. Kijakazi · filed 2022-09-27(a)(4)(ii)

At step two, the ALJ is required to consider whether Plaintiff’s alleged impairments constitute “medically determinable” impairments. See 20 C.F.R. §416.920(a)(4)(ii).

Section 416.920(c) requires the ALJ to determine whether the claimant has a medically determinable impairment or combination of impairments that significantly limits basic work activities.

Dubuc v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2022-10-24(c)

Second, the ALJ must determine whether the claimant has a medically determinable impairment or a combination of impairments that significantly limits the claimant’s ability to perform basic work activities. 20 C.F.R. § 416.920(c). Absent such impairment, the claimant may not claim disability. Id. ... A review of the entire record, however, demonstrates that the ALJ’s failure to consider Plaintiffs alleged intellectual disability at step two was error. Tr. 255, 1304, 1414. ... Here, the ALJ did not consider Plaintiffs alleged intellectual disability at step two or step three of the analysis, and as such, the Court “cannot say that the ALJ properly assessed a combination of Plaintiffs impairments, severe and non- severe, during the remaining steps.” Howard, 203 F. Supp. 3d at 298. Therefore, remand is appropriate for the ALJ to consider Plaintiffs alleged intellectual disability at steps two and three.

Section 416.920(a)(4)(ii) makes step two a threshold inquiry into whether an impairment is medically determinable and severe or non-severe.

Short v. Kijakazi · filed 2023-03-29(a)(4)(ii)

At step two of the sequential evaluation process, the ALJ considers whether a claimant’s impairment is (1) medically determinable or non-medically determinable, and (2) severe or non-severe; this step is essentially a threshold test.

At step two, § 416.920 requires the ALJ to decide whether an impairment is medically determinable and whether it is severe or non-severe.

Speraw v. Saul · filed 2023-03-27(a)(4)(ii)

At step two of the sequential evaluation process, the ALJ considers whether a claimant’s impairment is (1) medically determinable or non-medically determinable, and (2) severe or non-severe; this step is essentially a threshold test. ... Accordingly, we find that the ALJ did not err at step two.

At step two, § 416.920(a)(4)(ii) requires evidence from an acceptable medical source to establish a medically determinable impairment before the ALJ evaluates its severity.

Noel v. Kijakazi · filed 2024-01-10(a)(4)(ii)

To meet this low threshold, the claimant must provide evidence from acceptable medical sources to establish a medically determinable impairment. See 20 C.F.R. §§ 416.920(4)(ii), 416.921.

Section 416.920(a)(4)(ii) requires an ALJ at step two to determine whether a claimant's alleged impairment is medically determinable before classifying its severity.

Walker v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2024-07-31(a)(4)(ii)

At the second step, an ALJ must consider whether a claimant’s alleged impairments are “medically determinable.” 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1520(a)(4)(ii), 416.920(a)(4)(ii). ... After identifying a claimant’s medically determinable impairments, the ALJ must classify each as either “severe” or “not severe.”

Section 416.920(a)(4) governs the sequential disability evaluation, and an impairment that is not medically determinable need not be considered in that process.

Buckley v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2024-11-20(a)(4)

Chronic fatigue syndrome is thus not a “medically determinable impairment” for Plaintiff, and it was therefore not an error for the ALJ to not consider the same. See 20 C.F.R. § 416.920(a)(4).

At step two, § 416.920(a)(4)(ii) requires the ALJ to determine whether the claimant has any severe medically determinable impairments.

Wimbley v. O'Malley · filed 2025-03-31(a)(4)(ii)

“At step two of the disability analysis, the ALJ must determine whether the claimant has any ‘severe medically determinable’ impairments.” ... “The ALJ’s written decision does not analyze whether the headaches were severe or non-severe impairments, and does not explicitly make a finding on whether the headaches were medically determinable impairments (although the written decision’s reference to the September 2012 treatment record would appear to imply that they are medically determinable).”

At Step Two, § 416.920(a)(4)(ii) requires evaluating whether the claimant has a severe impairment or combination of impairments meeting the duration requirement; if not, the claimant is not disabled.

Walsh v. Bisignano · filed 2025-09-29(a)(4)(ii)

As explained above, at Step Two, the ALJ must determine whether the claimant has “a severe medically determinable physical or mental impairment,” or “a combination of impairments that is severe,” that lasted or is expected to last for at least twelve months. See 20 C.F.R. § 416.909; 416.920(a)(4)(ii). “An impairment is not severe if it amounts only to a slight abnormality that would not significantly limit the claimant’s physical or mental ability to do basic work activities.” Kirby v. Astrue, 500 F.3d 705, 707 (8th Cir. 2007).

At step two, an ALJ determines whether the claimant has a severe impairment; any severe impairment satisfies step two, after which the ALJ must consider the claimant’s limitations at later steps.

Kang · filed 2026-02-10(a)(4)(ii), (c)

At step two, an ALJ considers the severity of a claimant’s impairments. 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1520(a)(4)(ii), 416.920(a)(4)(ii). An impairment or combination of impairments is not severe “if it does not significantly limit [a claimant’s] physical or mental ability to do basic work activities” 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1522(a), 416.922(a). In other words, a severe impairment is an impairment or combination thereof that significantly limits a claimant’s abilities to perform basic work activities. See SSR 85-28, 1985 WL 56856, *4 n.1; 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1520(c), 404.1522(a), 416.920(c), 416.922(a).

At step two, § 416.920 requires the ALJ to fairly and fully consider objective medical evidence when evaluating whether an impairment is medically determinable.

Forbes v. King · filed 2025-02-12(a)(4)(ii)

As is explained below, by not fairly and fully considering the objective medical evidence related to Plaintiff’s rheumatoid arthritis and/or lupus, the ALJ erred. This error impacted the remainder of the ALJ’s disability evaluation.

At step two, a claimant bears the burden of showing that an impairment or combination of impairments significantly limits the ability to perform basic work activities.

Petersen v. Saul · filed 2020-11-10(c)

Rather, Plaintiff must show that the impairment “significantly limit[ed]” her ability to perform “basic work activity.” Hawkins v. Chater, 113 F.3d 1162, 1169 (10th Cir. 1997) (at step two a claimant has the burden to “demonstrate an impairment or combination of impairments that significantly limits the claimant’s ability to do basic work activity.”) (citing 20 C.F.R. § 416.920(c)).

Section 416.920(a)(3) requires the ALJ to consider all evidence in the claimant’s case record when deciding whether the claimant is disabled.

Kelley v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2020-12-22(a)(3)

The ALJ discounted these observations because Dr. Korgeski did not offer a definitive diagnosis. This was error. See 20 C.F.R. § 416.920(a)(3) (requiring an ALJ to consider “all evidence in your case record when we make a determination or decision whether you are disabled.”); Lopez v. Sec'y of Dep't of Health & Human Servs., 728 F.2d 148, 150-51 (2d Cir. 1984) (holding that a decision should be remanded “when it appears that the ALJ has failed to consider relevant and probative evidence which is available to him.”).

Section 416.920(c) requires a medically determinable impairment to significantly limit an individual's ability to perform basic work activities to be considered severe at step two.

Haynes v. Kijakazi · filed 2021-09-03(c)

Furthermore, for that medically determinable impairment to be considered ‘severe’ at step two of the sequential analysis, it must significantly limit an individual's ability to perform basic work activities.

At step three, § 416.920 requires the ALJ to determine whether the claimant’s impairment meets or equals a listed impairment, in which case the claimant is considered disabled without further inquiry.

Moore v. Saul · filed 2021-02-01(a)(4)(iii), (d)

At step three of the sequential evaluation process, the ALJ considers whether one or more of the claimant’s impairments meets or equals an impairment listed in Appendix 1 to Subpart P of the regulations. 20 C.F.R. § 416.920(a)(4)(iii). Each Listing sets forth the “symptoms, signs, and laboratory findings” which must be established for a claimant’s impairment to meet the Listing. Tackett v. Apfel, 180 F.3d 1094, 1099 (9th Cir. 1999). If a condition meets or equals a Listing, the claimant is considered disabled without further inquiry. 20 C.F.R. § 416.920(d).

At step three, the ALJ must determine whether the claimant’s impairment or combination of impairments meets or medically equals a listed impairment.

SHEPARD v. KIJAKAZI · filed 2022-11-18(d)

At step three, the ALJ must determine whether the claimant has an impairment, or combination of impairments, which meets or equals an impairment found in the Listing of Impairments. See 20 C.F.R. § 404, Subpt. P, App. 1 (20 C.F.R. §§ 416.920(d), 416.925, and 416.926). ... That said, as noted above, the ALJ did not confront Claimant's reported medication side effects, and this Court cannot say without a doubt that proper consideration of Claimant's reported medication side effects would not change the ALJ's Paragraph B criteria analysis, particularly with regard to concentration, persistence, or pace. Thus, on remand, the Undersigned recommends that the ALJ be instructed to, at a minimum, explain whether and how Claimant's medication side effects affect her analysis at Step Three.

Section 416.920(a)(4)(iii) requires the adjudicator at step three to determine whether the claimant's impairment meets or equals a listed impairment, and § 416.920(d) provides that a claimant who meets or equals a listing is considered disabled without further inquiry.

Walton v. Saul · filed 2021-02-12(a)(4)(iii)

At step three of the sequential evaluation process, the ALJ considers whether one or more of the claimant’s impairments meets or equals an impairment listed in Appendix 1 to Subpart P of the regulations. 20 C.F.R. § 416.920(a)(4)(iii). Each Listing sets forth the “symptoms, signs, and laboratory findings” which must be established for a claimant’s impairment to meet the Listing. Tackett v. Apfel, 180 F.3d 1094, 1099 (9th Cir. 1999). If a claimant meets or equals a Listing, the claimant is considered disabled without further inquiry. 20 C.F.R. § 416.920(d).

At step three of the disability evaluation, a claimant is disabled if the impairment meets or medically equals a listed impairment.

Herndon v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2021-03-03(a)(4)(iii)

At the third step in the disability evaluation process, a claimant will be found disabled if her impairment meets or equals one of the Listing of Impairments. See 20 C.F.R. § 416.920(a)(4)(iii); Turner v. Comm’r of Soc. Sec., 381 F. App’x 488, 491 (6th Cir. 2010).

At Step Three, a claimant is considered disabled if the impairment meets or equals a listed impairment, and the claimant must satisfy every element of the listing.

Lewis v. Commissioner of the Social Security Administration · filed 2021-03-16(d)

At Step Three in the ALJ’s evaluation process, the applicant may show that his impairment meets or equals a listed impairment, in which case, he will be considered disabled without regard to age, education, and work experience. 20 C.F.R. § 416.920(d); see Turner v. Comm’r of Soc. Sec., 381 F. App’x 488, 491 (6th Cir. 2010).

Section 416.920(a)(4)(iii) requires consideration of relevant evidence when determining whether a claimant’s impairment meets or medically equals a listed impairment.

Valladares v. Kijakazi · filed 2021-03-17(a)(4)(iii)

The ALJ is obligated to consider the relevant evidence to determine whether a claimant's impairment(s) meet or equal one of the specified impairments set forth in the listings.