20 C.F.R. § 416.920

Section 416.920(a) applies the Social Security disability five-step sequential evaluation framework to supplemental security income applications.

Williams v. Saul(CONSENT) · filed 2021-02-19(a)

The same statutory framework applies to applications for supplemental security income disability benefits brought under 20 C.F.R. § 416.920(a).

Section 416.920 requires disability to be evaluated through sequential steps, including determining whether the claimant has a severe impairment at Step Two and whether the impairment meets or equals a listed impairment at Step Three; the court found the ALJ erred by omitting diagnoses and that the claimant’s impairments met relevant listings.

Relerford v. Berryhill · filed 2021-03-09(a)(4)(ii), (a)(4)(iii)

At Step Two, the claimant bears the burden of showing that he has a medically severe impairment or combination of impairments. See 20 C.F.R. § 416.920(a)(4)(ii), (c). ... However, the ALJ failed to even mention, let alone discuss and analyze, Plaintiff’s diagnoses for PTSD and schizoaffective disorder of the depressive type. At Step Three, the ALJ compares the claimant’s impairments to the impairments listed in appendix 1 to subpart P of part 404. See 20 C.F.R. § 416.920(a)(4)(iii), (d). The claimant bears the burden of showing his impairments meet or equal an impairment in the listing. Id. If the claimant is successful, a disability is presumed and benefits are awarded. Id. If the claimant is unsuccessful, the ALJ assesses the claimant’s residual functional capacity (“RFC”) and proceeds to Step Four. See id. § 416.920(a)(4)(iv), (e). ... Plaintiff’s major depressive disorder, his PTSD, and his intellectual disability would undoubtedly compel independent disability findings at Step Three because they each clearly meet the criteria for the three relevant listings, to wit: Listing 12.04(A)(1) (depressive disorder), Listing 12.15 (trauma-related disorders), and Listing 12.05 (intellectual disorder)).

Section 416.920(a)(4) governs the five-step disability evaluation; at step two, a claimant must have a severe medically determinable impairment for the analysis to proceed.

Rutledge v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2021-03-09(a)(4)

A well-established five-step sequential evaluation process guides the disability analysis. 20 C.F.R. §416.920(a)(4). Step One requires a determination whether the claimant is engaging in “substantial gainful activity.” §416.920(a)(4)(i) and (b). An individual who engages in substantial gainful activity is not disabled, no matter whether he has physical or mental impairments, even severe ones, as they do not limit him from working. Id. If the claimant is not engaging in SGA, the analysis proceeds to Step Two, at which the Commission considers whether the claimant has a medically determinable impairment, or a combination of such impairments, that is “severe,” meaning significantly limits his ability to perform basic work activities. §416.920(a)(4)(ii) and (c). Severe impairments must also meet a “duration requirement” under §416.909 by lasting, or being expected to last, “for a continuous period of at least 12 months.”

Section 416.920(a) requires a five-step sequential evaluation of disability, covering substantial gainful activity, severe impairments, listed impairments, RFC and past relevant work, and available work in the national economy.

Thompson v. SSA · filed 2021-03-09(a)

For context, the Court briefly outlines the proper five-step sequential analysis as conducted by an ALJ in determining disability status. ... In the first step, the ALJ decides whether the claimant is performing substantial gainful activity. ... In the second step, the ALJ determines whether the claimant suffers from any severe impairments. ... In the third step, the ALJ decides whether such impairments, either individually or collectively, meet an entry in the Listing of Impairments. ... In the fourth step, the ALJ determines the claimant’s RFC and assesses whether the claimant can perform past relevant work. ... Finally, in the fifth step, the burden shifts to the Commissioner. The ALJ must consider and decide whether there are jobs that exist in significant numbers in the national economy that the claimant could perform based on RFC, age, education, and work experience. ... If the ALJ determines at any step that the claimant is not disabled, the analysis ends there.

At the final step of the disability evaluation, the Commissioner must prove that the claimant can perform other jobs existing in significant numbers in the national economy, considering the claimant’s residual functional capacity, age, education, and past relevant work.

Kennedy v. Berryhill · filed 2021-03-05(a)(4)(v)

At the last step of the disability determination, the Commissioner has the burden to prove that plaintiff is capable of performing other jobs existing in significant numbers in the national economy in light of plaintiff’s RFC, age, education, and past relevant work. 20 C.F.R. §§ 416.920, 416.960. In relying on a vocational expert’s testimony to satisfy this burden, posing a “hypothetical question that does not present the full extent of a claimant’s impairments cannot provide a sound basis for vocational expert testimony.”

Section 416.920(a)(4) provides a five-step sequential evaluation process for SSI disability claims, and the evaluation stops when the claimant is found disabled or not disabled at a step.

(SS) Tara Fae Alexander v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2021-03-11(a)(4)

Burch v. Barnhart, 400 F.3d 676, 679 (9th Cir. 2005); see also 20 C.F.R. § 416.920(a)(4) (providing the “five-step sequential evaluation process” for SSI claimants). “If a claimant is found to be ‘disabled’ or ‘not disabled’ at any step in the sequence, there is no need to consider subsequent steps.” Tackett, 180 F.3d at 1098 (citing 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520); 20 C.F.R. § 416.920.

Section 416.920(a)(4) requires disability claims to be evaluated through a five-step sequential process covering substantial gainful activity, severe impairment, listed impairments, past relevant work, and other work in the national economy.

Simon v. Commissioner of Social Security Administration · filed 2021-03-11(a)(4)

An ALJ follows a five-step sequential evaluation process to assess whether someone is disabled. 20 C.F.R. § 416.920(a)(4); Lester v. Chater, 81 F.3d 821, 828 n.5 (9th Cir. 1995) (as amended Apr. 9, 1996). In the first step, the Commissioner must determine whether the claimant is currently engaged in substantial gainful activity; if so, the claimant is not disabled and the claim must be denied. ... If the claimant is not engaged in substantial gainful activity, the second step requires the Commissioner to determine whether the claimant has a “severe” impairment or combination of impairments significantly limiting her ability to do basic work activities; if not, a finding of not disabled is made and the claim must be denied. ... If the claimant has a “severe” impairment or combination of impairments, the third step requires the Commissioner to determine whether the impairment or combination of impairments meets or equals an impairment in the Listing of Impairments (“Listing”) set forth at 20 C.F.R., part 404, subpart P, appendix 1; if so, disability is conclusively presumed and benefits are awarded. ... Before proceeding to step four, the ALJ must determine the claimant’s residual functional capacity (“RFC”). ... The fourth step requires that the ALJ determine whether the claimant’s RFC is sufficient to perform past relevant work. ... If it is not or the claimant has no past relevant work, the Commissioner then bears the burden of establishing that she is not disabled because she can perform other substantial gainful work in the national economy, the fifth and final step of the analysis.

Section 416.920(a) requires an ALJ to use a five-step sequential process to determine disability, ending the analysis if the claimant is found not disabled at any step.

Vest v. SSA · filed 2021-03-23(a)

For context, the Court briefly outlines the proper five-step sequential analysis as conducted by an ALJ in determining disability status. See Preslar v. Sec’y of Health & Human Servs., 14 F.3d 1107, 1110 (6th Cir. 1994); 20 C.F.R. §§ 416.920(a), 404.1520(a). In the first step, the ALJ decides whether the claimant is performing substantial gainful activity. 20 C.F.R. §§ 416.920(a)(4)(i), 404.1520(a)(4)(i). In the second step, the ALJ determines whether the claimant suffers from any severe impairments. Id. at §§ 416.920(a)(4)(ii), 404.1520(a)(4)(ii). In the third step, the ALJ decides whether such impairments, either individually or collectively, meet an entry in the Listing of Impairments. Id. at §§ 416.920(a)(4)(iii), 404.1520(a)(4)(iii). In the fourth step, the ALJ determines the claimant’s RFC and assesses whether the claimant can perform past relevant work. Id. at §§ 416.920(a)(4)(iv), 404.1520(a)(4)(iv). Finally, in the fifth step, the burden shifts to the Commissioner. The ALJ must consider and decide whether there are jobs that exist in significant numbers in the national economy that the claimant could perform based on RFC, age, education, and work experience. Id. at §§ 416.920(a)(4)(v), 404.1520(a)(4)(v). If the ALJ determines at any step that the claimant is not disabled, the analysis ends there.

Section 416.920 sets out a five-step sequential evaluation for disability claims, assigning the claimant the burden at steps one through four and the Commissioner the burden at step five.

Maxwell v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2021-03-26

The Commissioner has established a five-step sequential evaluation for adjudicating disability claims set forth at 20 C.F.R. § 416.920. Plaintiff has the burden at the first four steps. The Commissioner has the burden at the fifth step of demonstrating that the claimant can perform other work existing in significant numbers in the national economy, but the burden of proving disability is always on the claimant.

Section 416.920(a)(1) requires an ALJ to use a five-step sequential evaluation to determine whether a claimant is disabled.

Ramirez v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2021-03-31(a)(1)

An ALJ must perform a five-step sequential evaluation to determine if a claimant is disabled. 20 C.F.R. § 416.920(a)(1). This five-step process determines: (1) whether the claimant is engaged in substantial gainful activity; (2) if not, whether the claimant has a severe impairment or combination of impairments; (3) if so, whether these impairments meet or equal an impairment listed in the Listing of Impairments; (4) if not, whether the claimant has the residual functional capacity (“RFC”) to perform [her] past relevant work; and (5) if not, whether, in light of [her] age, education, and work experience, the claimant can perform other work that exists in “significant numbers in the national economy.”

Section 416.920(a) establishes a five-step process for determining disability, including sequential consideration of work activity, impairment severity, listed impairments, residual functional capacity, and ability to adjust to other work.

Glass v. Berryhill · filed 2021-04-14(a)

To qualify for supplemental security income under the Social Security Act, plaintiff must establish that she is "disabled." 42 U.S.C. § 1382(a)(l). The SSA has established a five-step sequential evaluation process for assessing whether an individual is disabled. See 20 C.F.R. § 416.920(a). The first three steps involve, respectively, the ALJ considering whether the individual is currently engaged in "substantial gainful activity," whether the medical impairment is "severe," and whether the severe medical impairment meets one of the "listings" in the relevant subpart Appendix. § 416.920(a)(4)(i)-(iii). If the severe medical impairment is not a listed impairment under the third step, the ALJ then assesses the individual's RFC before moving on to the fourth step. § 416.920(a)(4), (e). An individual's RFC is the most she can still do despite her limitations and is assessed based on all the relevant evidence in the record. § 416.945(a)(l). If the ALJ finds that the individual can adjust to other work based on her age, education, and the RFC assessment, she is not disabled under the Social Security Act. § 416.920(h).

Section 416.920 requires disability claims to be evaluated in a sequential five-step process addressing substantial gainful activity, severe impairment, listed impairments, past work and residual functional capacity, and other work in the national economy.

Pontiff v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2021-04-23

The factual determination is made by using a five-step test. See 20 C.F.R. § 416.920. In the following order, the ALJ must evaluate whether the claimant: 1) currently performs or, during the relevant time period, did perform any substantial gainful activity; 2) suffers from an impairment that is severe or whether a combination of his impairments is severe; 3) suffers from an impairment which meets or equals any impairment listed in the appendix and which meets the duration requirement; 4) is unable to perform his past relevant work which includes an assessment of the claimant’s residual functional capacity; and 5) is unable to perform any other work existing in significant numbers in the national economy. Id. An affirmative answer at steps 3 or 5 leads to a finding that the plaintiff is disabled.

Section 416.920 establishes a five-step sequential process for deciding disability and assigns the claimant the burden through the first four steps and the Commissioner the burden at the fifth.

Anderson v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2021-07-15(a)(4)

The Commissioner has established a five-step sequential evaluation process to determine whether an individual is disabled under the Act. See 20 C.F.R. § 416.920. ... The claimant has the burden of proof on the first four steps; the Commissioner has the burden of proof on the fifth step. ... The fifth step is divided into two parts. First, the Commissioner must assess the claimant's job qualifications by considering his or her physical ability, age, education, and work experience. Second, the Commissioner must determine whether jobs exist in the national economy that a person having the claimant's qualifications could perform.

Section 416.920(a) requires disability determinations to proceed through a five-step sequential evaluation, with the answer at each step determining whether the inquiry advances or ends in a disability or nondisability finding.

Smith v. Social Security Administration, Commissioner · filed 2021-08-19(a)

“An affirmative answer to any of the above questions leads either to the next question, or, on steps three and five, to a finding of disability. A negative answer to any question, other than step three, leads to a determination of ‘not disabled.’” Id. (citing 20 C.F.R. § 416.920(a)-(f)).

Section 416.920(a)(4) sets out a five-step sequential evaluation for deciding disability claims, covering work activity, severe impairments, listed impairments, past relevant work, and other available work.

Bowers v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2021-08-04(a)(4)

Social Security Regulations require ALJs to resolve a disability claim through a five-step sequential evaluation of the evidence. See 20 C.F.R. § 416.920(a)(4). Although a dispositive finding at any step terminates the ALJ’s review, see Colvin v. Barnhart, 475 F.3d 727, 730 (6th Cir. 2007), if fully considered, the sequential review considers and answers five questions: 1. Is the claimant engaged in substantial gainful activity? 2. Does the claimant suffer from one or more severe impairments? 3. Do the claimant’s severe impairments, alone or in combination, meet or equal the criteria of an impairment set forth in the Commissioner’s Listing of Impairments, 20 C.F.R. Subpart P, Appendix 1? 4. Considering the claimant's residual functional capacity, can the claimant perform his or her past relevant work? 5. Considering the claimant’s age, education, past work experience, and residual functional capacity, can the claimant perform other work available in the national economy? See 20 C.F.R. § 416.920(a)(4); see also Henley v. Astrue, 573 F.3d 263, 264 (6th Cir. 2009); Foster v. Halter, 279 F.3d 348, 354 (6th Cir. 2001).

Section 416.920(a)(4) establishes a five-step regulatory framework for determining whether an individual is disabled.

Mains v. Saul · filed 2021-08-24(a)(4)

A five-step regulatory framework is used to determine whether an individual is disabled. 20 C.F.R. § 416.920(a)(4); see also Bowen v. Yuckert, 482 U.S. 137, 140-42 (1987) (describing five-step process); Pate-Fires, 564 F.3d at 942 (describing five-step process).

At step five, § 416.920(f) requires the ALJ to consider the claimant’s age, education, past relevant work experience, and residual functional capacity.

Lloyd v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2021-09-10(f)

In making a determination at step five of the sequential evaluation process, the ALJ must consider a claimant's age, education, past relevant work experience, and RFC. 20 C.F.R. §416.920(f).

Section 416.920 establishes a five-step sequential process for determining whether an individual is disabled, including consideration of substantial gainful activity, severe impairment, listed impairments, past relevant work, and available work in the national economy.

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

The Commissioner has established a five-step evaluation process to determine whether an individual is disabled as defined by the Social Security Act. See 20 C.F.R. § 416.920. ... The five-step process is as follows: (1) whether the claimant is currently engaged in substantial gainful activity; (2) whether the claimant has a severe impairment or combination of impairments; (3) whether the impairment meets or equals the severity of the specified impairments in the Listing of Impairments; (4) based on a ‘residual functional capacity’ assessment, whether the claimant can perform any of his or her past relevant work despite the impairment; and (5) whether there are significant numbers of jobs in the national economy that the claimant can perform given the claimant's residual functional capacity, age, education, and work experience.

Section 416.920(a)(4) establishes a five-step sequential evaluation process for determining disability, including whether the claimant can perform past relevant work and other work existing in significant numbers in the national economy.

Delage v. Kijakazi · filed 2021-09-07(a)(4)

Acting pursuant to its statutory rulemaking authority (42 U.S.C. § 405(a)), the Social Security Administration (“SSA”) promulgated regulations establishing a five-step sequential evaluation process to determine disability. 20 C.F.R. § 416.920(a)(4) (2015). Under that five-step sequential evaluation process, the decision-maker determines: (1) whether the claimant is currently engaged in substantial gainful activity; (2) whether the claimant has a severe impairment or combination of impairments; (3) whether the impairment meets or equals the severity of the specified impairments in the Listing of Impairments; (4) based on a “residual functional capacity” assessment, whether the claimant can perform any of his or her past relevant work despite the impairment; and (5) whether there are significant numbers of jobs in the national economy that the claimant can perform given the claimant’s residual functional capacity, age, education, and work experience.

Section 416.920(a)(4) requires the ALJ to evaluate disability through a sequential five-step inquiry, proceeding through the listed questions in order.

Starcevich v. Kijakazi · filed 2021-09-13(a)(4)

To determine whether a claimant is disabled, the ALJ conducts a five-step inquiry: (1) whether the claimant is currently unemployed; (2) whether the claimant has a severe impairment; (3) whether the claimant’s impairment meets or equals any of the listings found in the regulations, see 20 C.F.R. § 404, Subpt. P, App. 1 (2004); (4) whether the claimant is unable to perform her former occupation; and (5) whether the claimant is unable to perform any other available work in light of her age, education, and work experience. 20 C.F.R. § 416.920(a)(4); Clifford v. Apfel, 227 F.3d 863, 868 (7th Cir. 2000). These steps are to be performed sequentially. 20 C.F.R. § 416.920(a)(4).

Section 416.920(a)(4) requires disability claims to be evaluated through five steps: current work, severity, listed impairment, past work, and ability to perform other work in the national economy.

MARTIN v. KIJAKAZI · filed 2021-09-21(a)(4)

The SSA applies a five-step evaluation to determine whether the claimant is disabled. Stephens, 888 F.3d at 327 (citing 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520(a)(4); 20 C.F.R. § 416.920(a)(4)). The ALJ must evaluate the following, in sequence: whether the claimant is currently [un]employed; (2) whether the claimant has a severe impairment; (3) whether the claimant's impairment meets or equals one of the impairments listed by the [Commissioner]; (4) whether the claimant can perform [his] past work; and (5) whether the claimant is capable of performing work in the national economy.

Section 416.920 requires a five-step sequential evaluation of disability: substantial gainful activity, severe impairment, listed impairment, past relevant work based on residual functional capacity, and other national-economy work considering the claimant's residual functional capacity and vocational factors.

Rogers v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2021-09-24

The Commissioner has established a five-step evaluation process to determine whether an individual is disabled as defined by the Social Security Act. See 20 C.F.R. § 416.920. The Supreme Court has recognized the validity of this sequential evaluation process. See Bowen v. Yuckert, 482 U.S. 137, 140-42, 107 S. Ct. 2287 (1987). The five-step process is as follows: (1) whether the claimant is currently engaged in substantial gainful activity; (2) whether the claimant has a severe impairment or combination of impairments; (3) whether the impairment meets or equals the severity of the specified impairments in the Listing of Impairments; (4) based on a ‘residual functional capacity’ assessment, whether the claimant can perform any of his or her past relevant work despite the impairment; and (5) whether there are significant numbers of jobs in the national economy that the claimant can perform given the claimant's residual functional capacity, age, education, and work experience.

Section 416.920(a) requires disability claims to be evaluated through a five-step sequential process addressing work activity, impairment severity, listed impairments, past work, and other available work.

Bencs v. Saul · filed 2021-09-27(a)

A five-step process, known as “sequential” review, is used by the Commissioner in determining whether a Social Security claimant is disabled. The Commissioner evaluates a disability claim pursuant to the following five-step analysis: a. An individual who is working and engaging in substantial gainful activity will not be found to be “disabled” regardless of medical findings; b. An individual who does not have a “severe impairment” will not be found to be disabled; c. If an individual is not working and is suffering from a severe impairment that meets the durational requirement and that “meets or equals a listed impairment in Appendix 1” of Subpart P of Regulations No. 4, a finding of “disabled” will be made without consideration of vocational factors; d. If, upon determining residual functional capacity, the Commissioner finds that an individual is capable of performing work he or she has done in the past, a finding of “not disabled” must be made; e. If an individual's residual functional capacity precludes the performance of past work, other factors including age, education, and past work experience must be considered to determine if other work can be performed. 20 C.F.R. § 416.920(a)-(f).

Section 416.920 requires an ALJ to use a five-step sequential inquiry to determine whether a claimant is disabled under the Social Security Act.

Mitchell v. Commissioner Social Security Administration · filed 2021-09-27

The ALJ engages in a five-step sequential inquiry to determine whether a claimant is disabled within the meaning of the Act.

Section 416.920(a)(1) requires ALJs to use a five-step sequential evaluation process to determine whether an SSI claimant is disabled.

THOMAS v. SAUL · filed 2021-09-27(a)(1)

To decide whether claimants, like Plaintiff, are “disabled” under the Act, ALJs employ a “five-step sequential evaluation process.” 20 C.F.R. § 416.920(a)(1).

Section 416.920(a)(4) requires disability claims to be evaluated through five sequential steps, including severity, listings, past work, and other available work.

Harlow v. Kijakazi · filed 2021-10-07(a)(4)

To determine whether a claimant is disabled, the ALJ conducts a five-step inquiry: (1) whether the claimant is currently unemployed; (2) whether the claimant has a severe impairment; (3) whether the claimant’s impairment meets or equals any of the listings found in the regulations, see 20 C.F.R. § 404, Subpt. P, App. 1 (2004); (4) whether the claimant is unable to perform his former occupation; and (5) whether the claimant is unable to perform any other available work in light of his age, education, and work experience. 20 C.F.R. § 416.920(a)(4); Clifford v. Apfel, 227 F.3d 863, 868 (7th Cir. 2000). These steps are to be performed sequentially. 20 C.F.R. § 416.920(a)(4).

Section 416.920 establishes a five-step sequential process for determining whether an individual is disabled: substantial gainful activity, severe impairment, a listed impairment, past relevant work based on residual functional capacity, and other national-economy work based on residual functional capacity and vocational factors.

Bumpus v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2021-10-21

The Commissioner has established a five-step evaluation process to determine whether an individual is disabled as defined by the Social Security Act. See 20 C.F.R. § 416.920. The Supreme Court has recognized the validity of this sequential evaluation process. See Bowen v. Yuckert, 482 U.S. 137, 140-42, 107 S. Ct. 2287 (1987). The five-step process is as follows: (1) whether the claimant is currently engaged in substantial gainful activity; (2) whether the claimant has a severe impairment or combination of impairments; (3) whether the impairment meets or equals the severity of the specified impairments in the Listing of Impairments; (4) based on a ‘residual functional capacity’ assessment, whether the claimant can perform any of his or her past relevant work despite the impairment; and (5) whether there are significant numbers of jobs in the national economy that the claimant can perform given the claimant's residual functional capacity, age, education, and work experience. McIntyre v. Colvin, 758 F.3d 146, 150 (2d Cir. 2014).

Section 416.920(a)(4)(iii) requires the ALJ at step three to determine whether a claimant’s impairments meet or equal a listed impairment.

Roberts v. Kijakazi · filed 2021-11-29(a)(4)(iii)

At step three of the sequential evaluation of disability, the ALJ must determine if a claimant's impairments meet or equal a listed impairment. 20 C.F.R. § 416.920(a)(4)(iii). ... For all of these reasons, Plaintiff fails to show error in the ALJ’s conclusion that her impairments did not meet Listing 12.08 or 12.15.

Section 416.920(a)(4) requires disability claims to be evaluated through successive steps, with the evaluation ending when the claimant is found disabled or not disabled at a step.

Belser v. Social Security Administration, Commissioner · filed 2021-12-27(a)(4)

Social Security regulations establish a five-step sequential process for determining whether a claimant is disabled. 20 C.F.R. § 416.920(a)(1). Throughout the process, the burden is on the claimant to introduce evidence in support of her application for benefits. Ellison v. Barnhart, 355 F.3d 1272, 1276 (11th Cir. 2003). If an ALJ finds a claimant disabled or not disabled at any given step, the ALJ does not go on to the next step. 20 C.F.R. § 416.920(a)(4). At the first step, the ALJ must determine whether the claimant is currently engaged in substantial gainful activity. § 416.920(a)(4)(i). At the second step, the ALJ must determine whether the impairment or combination of impairments from which the claimant allegedly suffers is “severe.” § 416.920(a)(4)(ii). Next, the ALJ must decide whether the claimant’s severe impairments meet or medically equal a listed impairment. § 416.920(a)(4)(iii). Where, as here, the ALJ finds that the claimant’s severe impairments do not meet or equal a listed impairment, the ALJ must then determine, at step four, whether she has the RFC to perform her past relevant work. § 416.920(a)(4)(iv). If the claimant cannot perform her past relevant work, the ALJ must then determine, as step five, whether the claimant’s RFC permits her to perform other work that exists in the national economy. § 416.920(a)(4)(v).

Section 416.920 requires an ALJ to use a five-step sequential inquiry to determine whether a claimant is disabled.

Walker v. Commissioner Social Security Administration · filed 2021-12-29

The ALJ engages in a five-step sequential inquiry to determine whether a claimant is disabled within the meaning of the Act. 20 C.F.R. § 416.920; Lounsburry v. Barnhart, 468 F.3d 1111, 1114 (9th Cir. 2006) (discussing Tackett v. Apfel, 180 F.3d 1094, 1098-99 (9th Cir. 1999)).

Section 416.920 requires the ALJ to determine disability through a five-step sequence addressing current employment, severe impairment, listed impairments, past relevant work, and the ability to perform other national-economy work in light of the claimant's RFC and vocational factors.

Miley v. Commissioner of Social Security Administration · filed 2022-01-20(a)-(f)

Social Security regulations establish a five-step sequential analysis to arrive at a final determination of disability. 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520; 20 C.F.R. § 416.920 (a)-(f). The ALJ must first determine whether the claimant is presently employed. If so, a finding of non-disability is made, and the inquiry concludes. 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520(b). In the second step, the ALJ must determine whether the claimant suffers from a severe impairment or combination of impairments. If the ALJ finds that claimant does not suffer from a severe impairment or combination of impairments, then a finding of non-disability results, and the inquiry ends. 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520(c). Step three requires the ALJ to compare the claimant’s severe impairment(s) to those in the listing of impairments. 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520(d), subpart P, appendix I. Certain impairments are so severe, whether considered alone or in conjunction with other impairments, that, if they are established, the regulations require a finding of disability without further inquiry into the claimant’s ability to perform other work. See Gibson v. Heckler, 762 F.2d 1516, 1518 n.1 (11th Cir. 1985). If the impairment meets or equals a listed impairment, disability is presumed and benefits are awarded. 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520(d). Step four involves a determination of whether the claimant’s impairments prevent him or her from performing his or her past relevant work. If the claimant cannot perform his or her past relevant work, then a prima facie case of disability is established. 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520(e). The burden then shifts to the ALJ to show at step five that, despite the claimant’s impairments, he or she is able to perform work in the national economy in light of the claimant’s RFC, age, education, and work experience. 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520(f); Phillips, 357 F. 3d at 1239. In order to determine whether the claimant has the ability to adjust to other work in the national economy, the ALJ may either apply the Medical Vocational Guidelines, 20 C.F.R. pt. 404 subpt. P, app.2, or utilize the assistance of a vocational expert. See Phillips, 357 F. 3d at 1239-40.

At step two, the claimant must have a severe impairment meeting the duration requirement, and at step five, the Commissioner must show that significant numbers of jobs exist that the claimant can perform given the claimant's residual functional capacity, age, education, and work experience.

Moulden v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2022-01-19(a)(4)(ii), (a)(4)(v)

At the second step in the sequential evaluation process, a claimant must demonstrate he suffers from a “severe medically determinable physical or mental impairment that meets the duration requirement . . . or a combination of impairments that is severe and meets the duration requirement . . .” 20 C.F.R. § 416.920(a)(4)(ii); Social Security Ruling 16-3p, 2017 WL 5180304, at *11 (Oct. 25, 2017); Higgs v. Bowen, 880 F.2d 860, 863 (6th Cir. 1988) (per curiam). ... At the fifth step, the Commissioner has the burden of demonstrating a significant number of jobs exist in the national economy that the claimant can perform, given his or her residual functional capacity, age, education, and past work experience. 20 C.F.R. §§ 416.920(a)(4)(v) and (g), 416.966(a); Wyatt v. Sec’y of Health & Human Servs., 974 F.2d 680, 684 (6th Cir. 1992); Moon v. Sullivan, 923 F.2d 1175, 1181 (6th Cir. 1990); Allen v. Califano, 613 F.2d 139, 145 (6th Cir. 1980).

Section 416.920 requires disability claims to be evaluated sequentially through five steps: substantial gainful activity, severe impairment, listed impairment, past relevant work based on residual functional capacity, and other national-economy work based on residual functional capacity and vocational factors.

Kelley v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2022-02-10

The Commissioner has established a five-step evaluation process to determine whether an individual is disabled as defined by the Social Security Act. See 20 C.F.R. § 416.920. The Supreme Court has recognized the validity of this sequential evaluation process. See Bowen v. Yuckert, 482 U.S. 137, 140-42, 107 S. Ct. 2287 (1987). The five-step process is as follows: (1) whether the claimant is currently engaged in substantial gainful activity; (2) whether the claimant has a severe impairment or combination of impairments; (3) whether the impairment meets or equals the severity of the specified impairments in the Listing of Impairments; (4) based on a ‘residual functional capacity’ assessment, whether the claimant can perform any of his or her past relevant work despite the impairment; and (5) whether there are significant numbers of jobs in the national economy that the claimant can perform given the claimant's residual functional capacity, age, education, and work experience.

Section 416.920 requires disability claims to be evaluated through a five-step sequential process, including a step-two determination of the severity of the claimant’s impairments.

Simpson v. Kijakazi · filed 2022-02-11(a)(4)(ii)

At step two the ALJ must consider the severity of a claimant’s impairments. 20 C.F.R. § 416.920(a)(4)(ii).

Section 416.920 requires disability claims to be evaluated through five sequential steps, and a step-two omission is harmless when another severe impairment is found and the evaluation proceeds.

Fisher v. Social Security Administration · filed 2022-02-22(a)(4)(ii)

When considering a disability application, the Commissioner is required to use a five-step sequential evaluation process. 20 C.F.R. § 416.920 (2012); Bowen v. Yuckert, 482 U.S. 137, 140 (1987). ... Although the Court agrees that the ALJ should have made a step-two finding as to Plaintiff’s MDD, the error is not reversible. ... Here, the ALJ found at least one severe impairment at step two and proceeded through the sequential evaluation process. ... The same is true in this case. Here, the ALJ proceeded through the sequential evaluation process and clearly considered Plaintiff’s depression in formulating the RFC. Tr. 22. Remand is not warranted on the ALJ’s failure to make a step-two finding on Plaintiff’s MDD.

Section 416.920(a)(4) requires an ALJ to evaluate disability claims through five steps in sequence: current work, severe impairment, listed impairment, past work, and the ability to perform other work in the national economy.

KELSO v. KIJAKAZI · filed 2022-03-21(a)(4)

"The SSA applies a five-step evaluation to determine whether the claimant is disabled. Stephens, 888 F.3d at 327 (citing 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520(a)(4); 20 C.F.R. § 416.920(a)(4)). The ALJ must evaluate the following, in sequence: (1) whether the claimant is currently [un]employed; (2) whether the claimant has a severe impairment; (3) whether the claimant's impairment meets or equals one of the impairments listed by the [Commissioner]; (4) whether the claimant can perform [his] past work; and (5) whether the claimant is capable of performing work in the national economy. Clifford v. Apfel, 227 F.3d 863, 868 (7th Cir. 2000), as amended (Dec. 13, 2000) (citations omitted)."

Section 416.920(a)(4) requires the ALJ to use a five-step sequential evaluation to determine whether a claimant is disabled.

WEIDEKAMP v. KIJAKAZI · filed 2022-03-22(a)(4)

The SSA applies a five-step evaluation to determine whether the claimant is disabled. Stephens, 888 F.3d at 327 (citing 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520(a)(4); 20 C.F.R. § 416.920(a)(4)). The ALJ must evaluate the following, in sequence: (1) whether the claimant is currently [un]employed; (2) whether the claimant has a severe impairment; (3) whether the claimant's impairment meets or equals one of the impairments listed by the [Commissioner]; (4) whether the claimant can perform her past work; and (5) whether the claimant is capable of performing work in the national economy.

Section 416.920 requires an ALJ to use a five-step disability evaluation, including determining whether the claimant has engaged in substantial gainful activity, has a severe impairment, and has an impairment meeting or equaling a listed impairment.

Lawton v. Kijakazi · filed 2022-03-21(a)(4)(ii), (b), (a)(4)(iii)

At Step One, the claimant bears the burden of showing he has not been engaged in “substantial gainful activity” since the alleged date on which the claimant became disabled. See 20 C.F.R. § 416.920(b). If the claimant has worked and the work is found to be substantial gainful activity, the claimant will be found not disabled. See id. ... At Step Two, the claimant bears the burden of showing that he has a medically severe impairment or combination of impairments. See 20 C.F.R. § 416.920(a)(4)(ii), (c). ... At Step Three, the ALJ compares the claimant’s impairments to the impairments listed in appendix 1 to subpart P of part 404. See 20 C.F.R. § 416.920(a)(4)(iii), (d).

Section 416.920 establishes a five-step disability evaluation, and an ALJ's failure to classify an impairment as severe at step two is harmless when the impairment is nevertheless considered later in the sequential process.

Beckwith v. Social Security Administration, Commissioner · filed 2022-03-23(a)(4)

The ALJ adequately considered Beckwith’s migraine headaches at step four despite failing to list the condition as a severe impairment at step two. Accordingly, the ALJ did not err at step two of the sequential evaluation process. Even if he did err, the error was harmless, and his failure to characterize Beckwith’s migraines as a severe impairment does not provide a basis for overturning the administrative decision.

Section 416.920(a) requires the Commissioner to consider a claimant’s residual functional capacity, age, education, and work experience when determining whether the claimant can perform work in the national economy.

Klingenberg v. O'Malley · filed 2022-03-30(a)

At Step Five, “the Commissioner has the burden ‘to identify specific jobs existing in substantial numbers in the national economy that [a] claimant can perform despite [his] identified limitations.’” Zavalin v. Colvin, 778 F.3d 842, 845 (9th Cir. 2015) (quoting Johnson v. Shalala, 60 F.3d 1428, 1432 (9th Cir. 1995)). The Commissioner considers the claimant’s RFC, age, education, and work experience in order to determine if the claimant is able to perform a job in the national economy. 20 C.F.R. § 416.920(a). ... Since the vocational expert’s testimony was based on a properly supported RFC determination by the ALJ, the Court finds the ALJ did not err at step five of the sequential evaluation process in this case.

Section 416.920(a)(4) establishes a five-step sequential process for deciding disability claims, and the inquiry need not proceed to later steps once a claimant is found disabled or not disabled at an earlier step.

(SS) Monroe v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2022-06-03(a)(4)

“The Social Security Regulations set out a five-step sequential process for determining whether a claimant is disabled within the meaning of the Social Security Act.” ... see also 20 C.F.R. § 416.920(a)(4) (providing the “five-step sequential evaluation process” for SSI claimants). “If a claimant is found to be ‘disabled’ or ‘not disabled’ at any step in the sequence, there is no need to consider subsequent steps.”

Section 416.920(a)(4) sets out a sequential five-step inquiry for determining disability: current work, severity, listed impairments, past work, and other available work.

Moreno v. Kijakazi · filed 2022-07-20(a)(4)

To determine whether a claimant is disabled, the ALJ conducts a five-step inquiry: (1) whether the claimant is currently unemployed; (2) whether the claimant has a severe impairment; (3) whether the claimant’s impairment meets or equals any of the listings found in the regulations, see 20 C.F.R. § 404, Subpt. P, App. 1 (2004); (4) whether the claimant is unable to perform her former occupation; and (5) whether the claimant is unable to perform any other available work in light of her age, education, and work experience. 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520(a)(4); 20 C.F.R. § 416.920(a)(4); Young v. Sec’y of Health & Human Servs., 957 F.2d 386, 389 (7th Cir. 1992); Zalewski v. Heckler, 760 F.2d 160, 162 (7th Cir. 1985). These steps are to be performed sequentially. 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520(a)(4); 20 C.F.R. § 416.920(a)(4).

Section 416.920 requires disability claims to be evaluated through a five-step sequential process, allocating the burden to the claimant through step four and to the Commissioner at step five.

Doreene S. v. Kijakazi · filed 2022-07-28

The ALJ must follow five steps in evaluating a claim of disability. See 20 C.F.R. § 416.920. First, if a claimant is working at a substantial gainful activity, the claimant is not disabled. 20 C.F.R. § 416.920(b). Second, if a claimant does not have any impairment or combination of impairments that significantly limit physical or mental ability to do basic work activities, then the claimant does not have a severe impairment and is not disabled. 20 C.F.R. § 416.920(c). Third, if a claimant’s impairments meet or equal an impairment listed in 20 C.F.R. Part 404, Appendix 1, the claimant is disabled. 20 C.F.R. § 416.920(d). Fourth, if a claimant’s impairments do not prevent doing past relevant work, the claimant is not disabled. 20 C.F.R. § 416.920(e)-(f). Fifth, if a claimant’s impairments (considering RFC, age, education and past work) prevent doing other work that exists in the local or national economy, a finding of disabled is warranted. 20 C.F.R. § 416.920(g). Significantly, the claimant bears the burden of proof at Steps One through Four, but the Commissioner bears the burden at Step Five. Sacilowski v. Saul, 959 F.3d 431, 434 (1st Cir. 2020); Wells v. Barnhart, 267 F. Supp. 2d 138, 144 (D. Mass. 2003) (five step process applies to SSI claims).

Section 416.920 requires ALJs to evaluate disability claims through a five-step sequential process: substantial gainful activity, severe impairment, listed impairment, past relevant work, and other work in the national economy.

Crue v. Kijakazi · filed 2022-08-24

The ALJ is required to evaluate a claimant’s disability determination using a five-step sequential evaluation process used to evaluate a claimant’s disability determination. See 20 C.F.R. § 416.920. “Under this process, an ALJ evaluates, in sequence, whether the claimant: ‘(1) worked during the alleged period of disability; (2) had a severe impairment; (3) had an impairment that met or equaled the requirements of a listed impairment; (4) could return to her past relevant work; and (5) if not, could perform any other work in the national economy.’” Kiser v. Saul, 821 F. App’x 211, 212 (4th Cir. 2020) (quoting Hancock v. Astrue, 667 F.3d 470, 472 (4th Cir. 2012)) (citation omitted).

Section 416.920 requires the Commissioner to evaluate disability claims through a five-step sequential process, and at step two a finding of at least one severe impairment is sufficient to proceed.

LITTLE v. COMMISSIONER OF SOCIAL SECURITY · filed 2022-09-08

Under the Regulations, the Commissioner evaluates a disability claim by means of a five-step sequential evaluation process. 20 C.F.R. § 416.920. First, the Commissioner determines whether the claimant is working. Second, the Commissioner determines whether the claimant suffers from a severe impairment which significantly limits his or her ability to carry out basic work activities. ... Having found at least one severe impairment at step two, the ALJ continued in the sequential evaluation. This was all that was required at step two.

Section 416.920(a)(4) requires an ALJ to determine disability through a five-step sequential evaluation addressing work activity, severe impairments, listed impairments, past relevant work, and other national-economy work.

Coley v. Social Security Administration, Commissioner · filed 2022-09-19(a)(4)

When a claim for disability benefits reaches an ALJ as part of the administrative process, the ALJ follows a five-step sequential analysis to determine whether the claimant is disabled. The ALJ must determine the following: (1) whether the claimant is engaged in substantial gainful activity; (2) if not, whether the claimant has a severe impairment or combination of impairments; (3) if so, whether that impairment or combination of impairments meets or equals any “Listing of Impairments” in the Social Security regulations; (4) if not, whether the claimant can perform his past relevant work in light of his “residual functional capacity” or “RFC”; and (5) if not, whether, based on the claimant’s age, education, and work experience, he can perform other work found in the national economy. 20 C.F.R. § 416.920(a)(4); see Winschel v. Commissioner of Soc. Sec. Admin., 631 F.3d 1176, 1178 (11th Cir. 2011).

Section 416.920 requires disability claims to be evaluated through a five-step sequence, including determining at step three whether the claimant’s impairment meets or medically equals a listed impairment; the claimant bears the burden to establish equivalence.

Yancey v. Kijakazi · filed 2022-09-27(d)

The Commissioner has established a five-step sequential evaluation process for determining whether a claimant is disabled. 20 C.F.R. § 416.920. ... If the impairment is severe, the evaluation proceeds to the third step, which compares the claimant’s impairment with listed impairments acknowledged by the Commissioner to be so severe as to preclude any gainful activity. 20 C.F.R. § 416.920(a)(4)(iii); see also 20 C.F.R. § 404, Subpt. P, App. 1. If the impairment meets or equals one of the listed impairments, the claimant is conclusively presumed to be disabled. ... To demonstrate that an unlisted impairment is equivalent to a listed impairment, a claimant “must present medical findings equal in severity to all the criteria for the one most similar listed impairment.” ... As Plaintiff has not satisfied her burden of proof for step three, the Court denies summary judgment to Plaintiff on this issue and grants summary judgment to the Commissioner with respect to ALJ LaCara’s step three assessment.

Section 416.920 requires disability claims to be evaluated through a five-step sequence, including a step-two determination of whether the claimant has a severe impairment.

Self v. Kijakazi · filed 2022-09-29(a)(4)(ii)

A person filing a claim for social security disability benefits (“the claimant”) must show that she has the “inability to do any substantial gainful activity by reason of any medically determinable physical or mental impairment” which has lasted or is expected to last for twelve or more months. See 20 C.F.R. §§ 416.920(a)(4)(ii), 416.909. The ALJ must consider all evidence in the claimant’s case record to determine disability (see id. § 416.920(a)(3)), and must use a five-step sequential evaluation process to determine whether the claimant is disabled (id. § 416.920; see also id. at § 404.1520). ... The evaluation at step two is a de minimis test intended to weed out the most minor of impairments. ... Here, the ALJ erred at step two by failing to even mention, let alone properly account for, Plaintiff’s learning disorder, his depression, his anxiety, or his PTSD – all of which yielded a substantial list of symptoms that are strongly indicative of substantial ensuing limitations (e.g., Plaintiff’s inability to read Dr. Catlin’s test questions, his extremely low frustration tolerance – as evidenced during the abortive evaluation before Dr. Catlin – as well as his low energy, poor motivation, social withdrawal, sleep disturbance, crying spells, anhedonia, problems with memory and concentration, poor appetite with weight loss, irritability, poor frustration tolerance, feelings of hopelessness, suicidal ideations, feelings of nervousness, excessive worry, ruminating thoughts, gastrointestinal distress, muscle tension, and frequent headaches).

Section 416.920 establishes a five-step sequential process for determining disability: substantial gainful activity, severe impairment, listed impairment, past relevant work based on residual functional capacity, and other work in the national economy based on residual functional capacity and vocational factors.

Reed v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2022-10-27

The Commissioner has established a five-step evaluation process to determine whether an individual is disabled as defined by the Social Security Act. See 20 C.F.R. § 416.920. The Supreme Court has recognized the validity of this sequential evaluation process. See Bowen v. Yuckert, 482 U.S. 137, 140-42, 107 S. Ct. 2287 (1987). The five-step process is as follows: (1) whether the claimant is currently engaged in substantial gainful activity; (2) whether the claimant has a severe impairment or combination of impairments; (3) whether the impairment meets or equals the severity of the specified impairments in the Listing of Impairments; (4) based on a ‘residual functional capacity’ assessment, whether the claimant can perform any of his or her past relevant work despite the impairment; and (5) whether there are significant numbers of jobs in the national economy that the claimant can perform given the claimant's residual functional capacity, age, education, and work experience.

At step five, the disability decision considers whether the claimant can perform other work in the national economy based on residual functional capacity, age, education, and work experience.

Olson v. Kijakazi · filed 2022-10-31(a)(4)(v)

If the claimant cannot perform this work, the fifth and final step in the process determines whether the claimant is able to perform other work in the national economy considering her residual functional capacity and age, education, and past work experience. 20 C.F.R. §§ 416.920(a)(4)(v), 404.1520(a)(4)(v); Bowen v. Yuckert, 482 U.S. 137, 142 (1987). ... Therefore, the RFC and hypothetical contained the limitations that the ALJ found credible and supported by substantial evidence in the record. The ALJ’s reliance on testimony the VE gave in response to the hypothetical was proper. See Bayliss v. Barnhart, 427 F.3d 1211, 1217–18 (9th Cir. 2005).

Section 416.920(a) sets out a five-step sequential evaluation for SSI disability and directs the ALJ to stop once the issue of disability can be resolved at a step.

Clanton v. Social Security Administration · filed 2022-11-03(a)

The Commissioner utilizes a five-step sequential evaluation process to determine whether a claimant is disabled and eligible for SSI. 20 C.F.R. § 416.920(a). If the issue of disability can be resolved at any point during the evaluation, the ALJ does not proceed to the next step and the claim is not reviewed further. Id. First, if the claimant is engaged in substantial gainful activity, he is not disabled. Id. Second, the claimant is not disabled if he does not have a severe medically determinable impairment that meets the 12-month durational requirements. Id. Third, the claimant is presumed disabled if he suffers from a listed impairment, or its equivalent, for the proper duration. Id. Fourth, the claimant is not disabled if, based on his residual functional capacity (“RFC”), he can perform past relevant work. Id. Fifth, if the claimant can adjust to other work based on his RFC, age, education, and work experience, he is not disabled. Id.

Section 416.920 establishes a five-step sequential evaluation for disability claims: the claimant bears the burden through the first four steps, while the Commissioner must show at step five that the claimant can perform other work existing in significant numbers; the claimant retains the ultimate burden of proving disability.

Golombek v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2022-11-14

In keeping with this function, the Commissioner has established a five- step sequential evaluation for adjudicating disability claims, which is set forth at 20 C.F.R. § 416.920. The claimant has the burden at the first four steps. The Commissioner has the burden at the fifth step of demonstrating that the claimant can perform other work existing in significant numbers in the national economy; but the burden of proving disability is always on the claimant. See 20 C.F.R. § 416.920; Lesterhuis v. Colvin, 805 F.3d 83, 87 (2d Cir. 2015) (stating that “[t]he claimant bears the ultimate burden of proving [disability] throughout the period for which benefits are sought”) (citation omitted).

Section 416.920(a)(4) requires the SSA to use a five-step sequential process to determine disability, with the claimant bearing the burden through step four and the Commissioner bearing it at step five.

Gibson v. Saul · filed 2022-11-23(a)(4)

The Social Security Administration (“SSA”) uses a five-step process to determine whether a claimant is disabled. See 20 C.F.R. § 416.920(a)(4) (2022). The claimant bears the burden of proof for the first four steps. See Butler v. Barnhart, 353 F.3d 992, 997 (D.C. Cir. 2004). First, a claimant must show that she is not presently engaged in “substantial gainful activity.” § 416.920(a)(4)(i). Second, she must demonstrate that she has a “severe impairment” that “significantly limits [her] physical or mental ability to do basic work activities.” §§ 416.920(a)(4)(ii), (c). Third, the claimant must show that her impairment or combination of impairments “meets or equals” one of the listings at 20 C.F.R. Part 404, Subpart P, App. 1. § 416.920(a)(4)(iii). If it does, then the claimant is deemed disabled and the inquiry ends. See §§ 416.920(a)(4)(iii), (d). If not, the ALJ must proceed to step four, which requires the ALJ to determine the claimant’s residual functional capacity (“RFC”) and consider whether, in light of the RFC, the claimant can still perform any past work. See § 416.920(a)(4)(iv). At step five, if the RFC indicates that the claimant cannot engage in past work, then “the burden shifts to the Commissioner” to prove that the claimant’s RFC, age, education, and past work experience indicate that she is “able to perform ‘other work’” that exists in the national economy. Butler, 353 F.3d at 997 (citing §§ 404.1520(f), 416.920(f)).

Section 416.920 requires an ALJ to evaluate a disability claim through a five-step sequential process: work activity, severity, listed impairment, past relevant work, and other work in the national economy.

Smith v. Kijakzi · filed 2022-12-19

The ALJ is required to evaluate a claimant’s disability determination using a five-step sequential evaluation process. See 20 C.F.R. § 416.920. “Under this process, an ALJ evaluates, in sequence, whether the claimant: ‘(1) worked during the alleged period of disability; (2) had a severe impairment; (3) had an impairment that met or equaled the requirements of a listed impairment; (4) could return to her past relevant work; and (5) if not, could perform any other work in the national economy.’”

Section 416.920(a)(4) requires the Commissioner to determine disability through a five-step sequence addressing substantial gainful activity, severe impairments, listed impairments, past relevant work, and other work.

Hernandez v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2023-02-24(a)(4)

“The Social Security Administration has outlined a ‘five-step, sequential evaluation process’ to determine whether a claimant is disabled[.]” Estrella v. Berryhill, 925 F.3d 90, 94 (2d Cir. 2019) (citations omitted); 20 C.F.R. § 416.920(a)(4). First, the Commissioner must determine whether the claimant is currently engaged in any “substantial gainful activity.” 20 C.F.R. § 416.920(a)(4)(i). Second, if the claimant is unemployed, the Commissioner must decide if the claimant has a “severe medically determinable physical or mental impairment,” id. § 416.920(a)(4)(ii), which is an impairment or combination of impairments that “significantly limits [the claimant’s] physical or mental ability to do basic work activities,” id. § 416.920(c). Third, if the claimant has such an impairment, the Commissioner considers whether the medical severity of the impairment “meets or equals” a listing in 20 C.F.R. Part 404, Subpart P, Appendix 1. See id. § 416.920(a)(4)(iii), 416.920(d). If so, the claimant is considered disabled. Id. ... Fourth, if the claimant’s impairment does not meet or equal a listed impairment, the Commissioner continues to the fourth step and determines whether the claimant has the residual functional capacity (“RFC”) to perform his or her past relevant work. 20 C.F.R. § 416.920(a)(4)(iv). If the claimant is able to do such work, he or she is not disabled. Id. § 416.920(a)(4)(iv). Finally, if the claimant is unable to perform past relevant work, the Commissioner must decide if the claimant’s RFC, in addition to his or her age, education, and work experience, permits the claimant to do other work. Id. § 416.920(a)(4)(v). If the claimant cannot perform other work, he or she will be deemed disabled. Id. § 416.920(a)(4)(v).

Section 416.920 requires disability claims to be evaluated through a five-step sequence, with the claimant bearing the burden through Step Four and the Commissioner bearing it at Step Five.

Foley v. Commissioner of Social Security Administration · filed 2023-02-27(b)

Under this five-step sequential analysis, the claimant has the burden of proof in Steps One through Four. Walters, 127 F.3d at 529. The burden shifts to the Commissioner at Step Five to establish whether the claimant has the residual functional capacity to perform available work in the national economy. Id. The ALJ considers the claimant’s residual functional capacity, age, education, and past work experience to determine if the claimant could perform other work. Id. Only if a claimant satisfies each element of the analysis, including inability to do other work, and meets the duration requirements, is she determined to be disabled. 20 C.F.R. § 416.920(b)-(f); see also Walters, 127 F.3d at 529.

Section 416.920 establishes a five-step process for determining whether an individual is disabled: substantial gainful activity, severe impairment, listed impairments, past relevant work based on residual functional capacity, and other national-economy work based on residual functional capacity, age, education, and experience.

Cross v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2023-03-02

The Commissioner has established a five-step evaluation process to determine whether an individual is disabled as defined by the Social Security Act. See 20 C.F.R. § 416.920. The Supreme Court has recognized the validity of this sequential evaluation process. See Bowen v. Yuckert, 482 U.S. 137, 140-42, 107 S. Ct. 2287 (1987). The five-step process is as follows: (1) whether the claimant is currently engaged in substantial gainful activity; (2) whether the claimant has a severe impairment or combination of impairments; (3) whether the impairment meets or equals the severity of the specified impairments in the Listing of Impairments; (4) based on a ‘residual functional capacity’ assessment, whether the claimant can perform any of his or her past relevant work despite the impairment; and (5) whether there are significant numbers of jobs in the national economy that the claimant can perform given the claimant's residual functional capacity, age, education, and work experience. McIntyre v. Colvin, 758 F.3d 146, 150 (2d Cir. 2014).

At step three, the ALJ must determine whether a claimant's impairment meets or equals a listed impairment; if it does, the claimant is considered disabled without further inquiry.

Pence v. Kijakazi · filed 2023-03-20(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 claimant meets or equals a Listing, the claimant is considered disabled without further inquiry. 20 C.F.R. § 416.920(d). ... The Court finds the ALJ did not err. Plaintiff has failed to present evidence that satisfies each of the elements of the Listing. Dr. Shapiro’s testimony that Plaintiff should not walk on uneven surfaces as part of her work requirements does not establish that she is unable to ambulate effectively, particularly in light of his additional statements that Plaintiff’s condition did not meet or equal any listing. Tr. 85-87.

Section 416.920(a)(4) establishes a five-step process for evaluating disability claims: work activity, impairment severity and duration, listed impairments, past work, and other work.

Shanette Rogers v. Kijakazi · filed 2023-03-20(a)(4)

In Mascio, we summarized the SSA’s five-step evaluation process under 20 C.F.R. § 416.920(a)(4) as follows: [T]he ALJ asks at step one whether the claimant has been working; at step two, whether the claimant’s medical impairments meet the regulations’ severity and duration requirements; at step three, whether the medical impairments meet or equal an impairment listed in the regulations; at step four, whether the claimant can perform her past work given the limitations caused by her medical impairments; and at step five, whether the claimant can perform other work.

Section 416.920 sets out a five-step sequential process for determining disability, with the claimant bearing the burden through the first four steps and the Commissioner bearing it at the final step.

Garcia v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2023-03-24

An ALJ makes this determination through a five-step evaluation process, where the burden rests on the plaintiff for the first four steps and only after all four steps are satisfied does the burden then shift to the commissioner for the final step. 20 C.F.R. § 416.920. First, an ALJ must determine that the plaintiff is not currently engaged in substantial gainful activity. 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1520(a)(4). Second, an ALJ must find that the plaintiff’s impairment is so severe that it limits her ability to perform basic work activities. (Id.). Third, an ALJ must evaluate whether the plaintiff’s impairment falls under one of the Listings, such that she may be presumed to be disabled. Absent that, an ALJ must then determine the claimant’s RFC, or her ability to perform physical and mental work activities on a sustained basis. (Id.). Fourth, an ALJ then evaluates if the plaintiff’s RFC precludes her from meeting the physical and mental demands of her prior employment. (Id.). If the plaintiff has satisfied all four of these steps, the burden then shifts to the commissioner to prove that based on the plaintiff’s RFC, age, education, and past work experience, the plaintiff is capable of performing some other work that exists in the national economy. (Id.).

Section 416.920(a)(4) requires disability claims to be evaluated through a five-step process, with step three asking whether the claimant’s impairments meet or equal a listed impairment.

Ricks v. Social Security Administration · filed 2023-03-30(a)(4)

The Administration must apply a five-step analysis to determine eligibility for benefits. 20 C.F.R. § 416.920(a)(4). ... As described above, the agency determines the severity of a claimant’s impairments at step three to determine whether the claimant’s symptoms meet or equal the criteria for an impairment listed in Appendix 1. 20 C.F.R. § 416.920(a)(4)(iii). If a claimant’s symptoms meet or equal a listing, he is disabled per se under the Social Security Act. Id.

Section 416.920 requires the Commissioner to evaluate SSI disability claims through five steps in order and stop the evaluation when a conclusive disability determination is made at any step.

Carter v. Kijakazi · filed 2023-04-17(a)(4)

The Commissioner uses a five-step process in evaluating SSI claims. See 20 C.F.R. § 416.920 (2021). ... This process requires the Commissioner to consider, in order, whether a claimant 1) is working; 2) has a severe impairment; 3) has an impairment that meets or equals the requirements of a listed impairment; 4) can return to his past relevant work; and 5) if not, whether he can perform other work. See 20 C.F.R. § 416.920. If the Commissioner finds conclusively that a claimant is or is not disabled at any point in this process, review does not proceed to the next step. See 20 C.F.R. § 416.920(a)(4) (2021).

Section 416.920 requires an ALJ to evaluate disability through a five-step sequential process addressing work activity, impairment severity, listings, past relevant work, and other national-economy work.

Williams v. Kijakazi · filed 2023-07-11

The ALJ is required to evaluate a claimant’s disability determination using a five-step sequential evaluation process. See 20 C.F.R. § 416.920. “Under this process, an ALJ evaluates, in sequence, whether the claimant: ‘(1) worked during the alleged period of disability; (2) had a severe impairment; (3) had an impairment that met or equaled the requirements of a listed impairment; (4) could return to her past relevant work; and (5) if not, could perform any other work in the national economy.’”

Section 416.920 requires disability claims to be evaluated through a five-step sequential process, with the claimant bearing the burden at the first four steps and the Commissioner at the fifth.

Alqawaqzeh v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2023-07-18(a)

The Commissioner has established a five-step sequential evaluation process to determine whether an individual is disabled under the Act. See 20 C.F.R. § 416.920. The Supreme Court recognized the validity of this analysis in Bowen v. Yuckert, and it remains the proper approach for analyzing whether a claimant is disabled.

Section 416.920 establishes a five-step disability evaluation: the decision maker assesses severe impairments, compares them with listed impairments, and, if the claimant cannot perform past work, considers the claimant’s RFC, age, education, and work experience to determine whether the claimant can perform other work in the national economy.

Durham v. Kijakazi · filed 2023-07-26(d), (a)(4)(ii), (a)(4)(v)

The Commissioner has established a five-step sequential evaluation process for determining whether a claimant is disabled. 20 C.F.R §§ 416.920, 404.1520. Step one determines if they are engaged in substantial gainful activities. If the claimant is engaged in substantial gainful activities, benefits are denied. 20 C.F.R. §§ 416.920(a)(4)(i), 404.1520(a)(4)(i). If the claimant is not engaged in substantial gainful activities, the decision maker proceeds to step two and determines whether the claimant has a medically severe impairment or combination of impairments. 20 C.F.R. §§ 416.920(a)(4)(ii), 404.1520(a)(4)(ii). If the claimant does not have a severe impairment or combination of impairments, the disability claim is denied. If the impairment is severe, the evaluation proceeds to the third step, which compares the claimant’s impairment with listed impairments acknowledged by the Commissioner to be so severe as to preclude any gainful activity. 20 C.F.R. §§ 416.920(a)(4)(iii), 404.1520(a)(4)(iii); see also 20 C.F.R. § 404, Subpt. P, App. 1. If the impairment meets or equals one of the listed impairments, the claimant is conclusively presumed to be disabled. If the impairment is not one conclusively presumed to be disabling, the evaluation proceeds to the fourth step, which determines whether the impairment prevents the claimant from performing work that they have performed in the past. If the claimant can perform their previous work, the claimant is not disabled. 20 C.F.R. §§ 416.920(a)(4)(iv), 404.1520(a)(4)(iv). At this step, the claimant’s RFC assessment is considered. If the claimant cannot perform this work, the fifth and final step in the process determines whether the claimant is able to perform other work in the national economy considering their residual functional capacity and age, education, and past work experience. 20 C.F.R. §§ 416.920(a)(4)(v), 404.1520(a)(4)(v); Bowen v. Yuckert, 482 U.S. 137, 142 (1987).

Section 416.920(a)(4)(iii) requires a finding of disability when a claimant meets or equals a listed impairment at step three.

Cutler v. Kijakazi · filed 2023-09-11(a)(4)(iii)

“Listed impairments set such strict standards because they automatically end the five-step inquiry, before residual functional capacity is even considered.” Kennedy, 738 F.3d at 1176. If a claimant meets the listed criteria for disability, he will be found to be disabled. 20 C.F.R. § 416.920(a)(4)(iii). ... The ALJ did not err by failing to consider Listing 4.02.

Section 416.920 establishes a five-step sequential process for determining whether an individual is disabled, considering substantial gainful activity, severe impairment, listed impairments, past relevant work, and work available in the national economy.

Casler v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2023-11-13

The Commissioner has established a five-step evaluation process to determine whether an individual is disabled as defined by the Social Security Act. See 20 C.F.R. § 416.920. The Supreme Court has recognized the validity of this sequential evaluation process. See Bowen v. Yuckert, 482 U.S. 137, 140-42, 107 S. Ct. 2287 (1987). The five-step process is as follows: (1) whether the claimant is currently engaged in substantial gainful activity; (2) whether the claimant has a severe impairment or combination of impairments; (3) whether the impairment meets or equals the severity of the specified impairments in the Listing of Impairments; (4) based on a ‘residual functional capacity’ assessment, whether the claimant can perform any of his or her past relevant work despite the impairment; and (5) whether there are significant numbers of jobs in the national economy that the claimant can perform given the claimant's residual functional capacity, age, education, and work experience.

Section 416.920(a)(4) requires an ALJ to evaluate disability claims through a sequential process that includes determining substantial gainful activity at step one, considering whether severe impairments meet or equal a listed impairment at step three, and assessing residual functional capacity to perform past relevant work at step four.

Marshall v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2023-12-14(a)(4)(i), (a)(4)(iii), (a)(4)(iv)

The ALJ must follow five steps in evaluating a claim of disability. 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1520, 416.920. At the first step, the ALJ must determine whether the claimant is currently engaged in substantial gainful employment. 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520(a)(4)(i), (b); 20 C.F.R. § 416.920(a)(4)(i), (b). At step two, the ALJ must determine whether the impairment or combination of impairments from which the claimant allegedly suffers is “severe.” 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520(a)(4)(ii), (c); 20 C.F.R. § 416.920(a)(4)(ii), (c). At step three, the ALJ must decide whether the claimant’s severe impairments meet or medically equal a listed impairment. 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520(a)(4)(iii), (d); 20 C.F.R. § 416.920(a)(4)(iii), (d). If the ALJ finds the claimant’s severe impairments do not meet or medically equal a listed impairment, then the ALJ must determine whether the claimant has the residual functional capacity (“RFC”) to perform her past relevant work. 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520(a)(4)(iv), (e)–(f); 20 C.F.R. § 416.920(a)(4)(iv), (e)–(f).

Section 416.920(a)(4) requires the Commissioner to use a five-step sequential inquiry to determine whether a claimant is disabled.

Hill v. Kijakazi · filed 2024-01-16(a)(4)

To determine if a claimant is disabled, the Commissioner follows a five-step sequential inquiry. See 20 C.F.R. § 416.920(a)(4)(i}H{v).

Section 416.920 requires an ALJ to evaluate a disability claim through a five-step sequential process.

David T. v. O'Malley · filed 2024-01-17

The ALJ must follow five steps in evaluating a claim of disability. See 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1520, 416.920.

Section 416.920(a)(4) requires a five-step sequence for determining disability: whether the claimant is employed, has a severe impairment, meets a listed impairment, can perform past work, and can perform work in the national economy.

BURTON v. O'MALLEY · filed 2024-02-20(a)(4)

"The SSA applies a five-step evaluation to determine whether the claimant is disabled. Stephens, 888 F.3d at 327 (citing 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520(a)(4); 20 C.F.R. § 416.920(a)(4)). The ALJ must evaluate the following, in sequence: (1) whether the claimant is currently [un]employed; (2) whether the claimant has a severe impairment; (3) whether the claimant's impairment meets or equals one of the impairments listed by the [Commissioner]; (4) whether the claimant can perform her past work; and (5) whether the claimant is capable of performing work in the national economy."

Section 416.920(a)(4) requires an ALJ to evaluate disability through five sequential determinations: substantial gainful activity, severe impairment, listed impairment, past relevant work, and other work considering the claimant’s vocational factors and residual functional capacity.

Boronow v. Kijakazi · filed 2024-03-06(a)(4)

Under this process, the ALJ must sequentially determine: (1) whether the claimant is engaged in substantial gainful activity; (2) whether the claimant has a severe impairment; (3) whether the claimant’s impairment meets or equals a listed impairment; (4) whether the claimant is able to do his or her past relevant work; and (5) whether the claimant is able to do any other work, considering his or her age, education, work experience and residual functional capacity (“RFC”).

Section 416.920 requires an ALJ to use a five-step sequential analysis to determine disability, with the claimant bearing the burden through Step Four and the Commissioner bearing it at Step Five.

Lopez v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2024-04-11

To make a determination of disability under this definition, an ALJ is required to follow a five-step sequential analysis set out in agency regulations, summarized as follows: 1. If the claimant is doing substantial gainful activity, he is not disabled. 2. If the claimant is not doing substantial gainful activity, his impairment must be severe before he can be found to be disabled. 3. If the claimant is not doing substantial gainful activity, is suffering from a severe impairment that has lasted or is expected to last for a continuous period of at least twelve months, and his impairment meets or equals a listed impairment, the claimant is presumed disabled without further inquiry. 4. If the impairment does not meet or equal a listed impairment, the ALJ must assess the claimant’s residual functional capacity and use it to determine if the claimant’s impairment prevents him from doing past relevant work. If the claimant’s impairment does not prevent him from doing his past relevant work, he is not disabled. 5. If the claimant is unable to perform past relevant work, he is not disabled if, based on his vocational factors and residual functional capacity, he is capable of performing other work that exists in significant numbers in the national economy. 20 C.F.R. § 416.920; see also Bowen v. Yuckert, 482 U.S. 137, 140–42 (1987). Under this sequential analysis, the claimant has the burden of proof at Steps One through Four. See Walters v. Comm’r of Soc. Sec., 127 F.3d 525, 529 (6th Cir. 1997). The burden shifts to the Commissioner at Step Five to establish whether the claimant has the Residual Functional Capacity (“RFC”) and vocational factors to perform other work available in the national economy. Id.

Section 416.920(a) establishes a five-step sequential process for determining disability, and the evaluation ends when the issue is resolved at any step.

Dial v. Kijakazi · filed 2024-05-06(a)

The SSA utilizes a five-step sequential evaluation process to determine whether a claimant is disabled. 20 C.F.R. § 416.920(a). If the issue of disability can be resolved at any point during the evaluation, the ALJ does not proceed to the next step and the claim is not reviewed further. Id. First, if the claimant is engaged in substantial gainful activity, he is not disabled. Id. Second, if the claimant does not have a severe medically determinable impairment that meets the 12-month durational requirements, he is not disabled. Id. Third, if the claimant suffers from a listed impairment, or its equivalent, for the proper duration, he is presumed disabled. Id. Fourth, if the claimant can perform relevant past work based on his residual functional capacity (“RFC”), which is an assessment of “the most you [the claimant] can still do despite your limitations,” 20 C.F.R. § 404.1545(a)(1), he is not disabled. Id. Fifth, if the claimant can adjust to other work based on his RFC, age, education, and work experience, he is not disabled. Id.

Section 416.920(a)(4) requires disability claims to be evaluated under a five-step sequential process: substantial gainful activity, severity, listed impairment, past relevant work, and other available work.

PADGETT v. KIJAKAZI · filed 2024-05-28(a)(4)

To determine whether a claimant is disabled, the Commissioner, as represented by the ALJ, employs a sequential, five-step analysis: (1) if the claimant is engaged in substantial gainful activity, he is not disabled; (2) if the claimant does not have a "severe" impairment, one that significantly limits his ability to perform basic work activities, he is not disabled; (3) if the claimant's impairment or combination of impairments meets or medically equals any impairment appearing in the Listing of Impairments, 20 C.F.R. pt. 404, subpart P, App. 1, the claimant is disabled; (4) if the claimant is not found to be disabled at step three, and is able to perform his past relevant work, he is not disabled; and (5) if the claimant is not found to be disabled at step three, cannot perform his past relevant work, but can perform certain other available work, he is not disabled. 20 C.F.R. § 416.920(a)(4).

Section 416.920 requires disability to be evaluated through a five-step sequential process, including whether the claimant can adjust to other work in the national economy.

Hood v. Commissioner Social Security Administration · filed 2024-06-20

Moreover, because the Commissioner has twice failed to. meet his burden under 20CFR § 416.920, and because under the credit-as-true doctrine, Plaintiff is disabled, the Court concludes that a remand for benefits is appropriate.

Section 416.920(a)(4) requires the five-step disability evaluation to stop once a claimant is found disabled or not disabled at a step.

Jacob v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2024-07-26(a)(4)

If it is determined at any step in the analysis that the claimant is disabled or not disabled, the evaluation does not proceed. See 20 C.F.R. § 416.920(a)(4).

At step two, the regulation requires the adjudicator to assess whether the claimant's impairments are severe; if at least one is severe, the evaluation continues, but all impairments—including non-severe ones—must still be considered in the RFC analysis at later steps.

STEWART v. COMMISSIONER OF SOCIAL SECURITY · filed 2024-08-06(a)(4)(ii)

At step two of the analysis, the ALJ evaluates whether the claimant’s medically determinable impairments or combination of impairments are “severe.” 20 C.F.R. § 416.920(a)(4)(ii). ... If the claimant is found to have at least one severe impairment at step two, the ALJ proceeds to the remaining steps of the analysis. 20 C.F.R. § 416.920(a)(4)(ii). ... More specifically, in determining the claimant’s RFC at step four, the ALJ is required to consider all of the claimant’s medically determinable impairments from step two, including those that were found to be “non-severe.”

Section 416.920(a)(4) sets out a five-step sequential evaluation for deciding whether a claimant is disabled.

M. v. O'Malley · filed 2024-08-14(a)(4)

In determining whether a claimant qualifies as disabled, the ALJ uses a five-step sequential evaluation, considering whether: ... 5) he has the residual functional capacity to perform other work, considering his age, education, and work experience. ... Consistent with the framework laid out in 20 C.F.R. § 416.935 and SSR 13-2p, the ALJ then applied the five-step sequential evaluation twice—first including substance use, and a second time in the absence of substance use.

At step five, the Commissioner assesses the claimant's qualifications and determines whether jobs exist in the national economy that the claimant can perform.

Fidanza v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2024-09-20(f)

Although the claimant has the burden of proof at the first four steps, the Commissioner has the burden of proof at the fifth and final step. ... The final step is divided into two parts. First, the Commissioner must assess the claimant’s job qualifications by considering his physical ability, age, education, and work experience. Second, the Commissioner must determine whether jobs exist in the national economy that a person having the claimant’s qualifications could perform. See 42 U.S.C. § 423(d)(2)(A); 20 C.F.R. § 416.920(f); see also Heckler v. Campbell, 461 U.S. 458, 460, 103 S. Ct. 1952, 76 L. Ed. 2d 66 (1983).

Section 416.920(a)(4) requires an ALJ to determine disability through a five-step sequential process, including evaluating listed impairments at step three, assessing residual functional capacity and past work at step four, and shifting the burden to the Commissioner at step five to show other available work.

Johnson v. Dudek · filed 2025-01-27(a)(4)

An ALJ must follow a five-step sequential analysis to determine whether a claimant is disabled. 20 C.F.R. § 416.920(a)(4). At step one, the claimant must demonstrate he is not engaged in substantial gainful activity. 20 C.F.R. § 416.920(a)(4)(i). At step two, the claimant must establish a severe, medically determinable impairment. 20 C.F.R. § 416.920(a)(4)(ii). At step three, the ALJ must determine whether the claimant’s impairments, if any, meet or are medically equal to one of the impairments listed in 20 C.F.R. Part 404, Subpart P, App’x 1 (“listed impairments”). 20 C.F.R. § 416.920(a)(4)(iii). If a claimant’s impairments meet or are medically equal to a listed impairment then he is disabled under the Act, if not, then the analysis proceeds to step four. At step four, the claimant must produce evidence to establish a residual functional capacity (“RFC”)2 and prove he cannot perform his past relevant work. 20 C.F.R. § 416.920(a)(4)(iv). If the claimant is deemed unable to perform past relevant work, the burden shifts to the Commissioner to prove at step five that claimant can perform other jobs that exist in significant number in the national economy. 20 C.F.R. § 416.920(a)(4)(v).

Section 416.920(a) requires disability claims to be evaluated through a five-step sequential process, beginning with whether the claimant is engaged in substantial gainful activity.

Johnson v. Social Security Administration, Commissioner · filed 2025-02-05(a)

When a claim for disability benefits reaches an ALJ as part of the administrative process, the ALJ follows a five-step sequential analysis to determine whether the claimant is disabled. The ALJ must determine the following: (1) whether the claimant is engaged in substantial gainful activity; (2) if not, whether the claimant has a severe impairment or combination of impairments; (3) if so, whether that impairment or combination of impairments meets or equals any “Listing of Impairments” in the Social Security regulations; (4) if not, whether the claimant can perform his past relevant work in light of his “residual functional capacity” or “RFC”; and, (5) if not, whether, based on the claimant’s age, education, and work experience, he can perform other work found in the national economy. 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1520(a)(4), 416.920(a)(4); see Winschel v. Commissioner of Soc. Sec. Admin., 631 F.3d 1176, 1178 (11th Cir. 2011). ... The ALJ’s opinion demonstrates that the ALJ considered Johnson’s medical records, hearing testimony, and prior administrative medical findings in arriving at the conclusion that Johnson had not been under a disability, as defined in the Social Security Act, since October 24, 2018. The ALJ correctly applied the five-step evaluation process, first finding that Johnson had not engaged in substantial gainful activity since his application date of October 24, 2018.

Section 416.920(a)(4) requires disability to be evaluated through five sequential inquiries: substantial gainful activity, a severe impairment, a listing, past relevant work, and adjustment to other work.

Wyatt v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2025-02-21(a)(4)

The Commissioner has promulgated regulations that set forth a five-step sequential evaluation process that an ALJ must follow in evaluating whether an individual is disabled. 20 C.F.R. § 416.920 (2024). In summary, the evaluation process proceeds as follows: (1) Is the claimant involved in substantial gainful activity? If the answer is “yes,” the claimant is not disabled. If the answer is “no,” proceed to the next step. (2) Does the claimant have a medically determinable impairment or combination of impairments that satisfies the duration requirement3 and significantly limits his or her physical or mental ability to do basic work activities? If the answer is “no,” the claimant is not disabled. If the answer is “yes,” proceed to the next step. (3) Does the claimant have an impairment that meets or medically equals the criteria of a listed impairment within 20 C.F.R. Part 404, Subpart P, Appendix 1? If the answer is “yes,” the claimant is disabled. If the answer is “no,” proceed to the next step. (4) Does the claimant have the RFC to return to his or her past relevant work? If the answer is “yes,” then the claimant is not disabled. If the answer is “no,” proceed to the next step. (5) Does the claimant’s RFC, age, education, and work experience allow him or her to make an adjustment to other work? If the answer is “yes,” the claimant is not disabled. If the answer is “no,” the claimant is disabled. 20 C.F.R. § 416.920(a)(4).

Section 416.920 requires the Commissioner to determine disability through a sequential five-step process, with the claimant bearing the burden through step four and the Commissioner bearing the burden at step five to show that the claimant can perform specific jobs in the national economy.

Ulitsch v. US Social Security Administration, Commissioner · filed 2025-03-04

To determine whether a claimant is disabled, the Commissioner must follow a sequential five-step process. 20 C.F.R. § 416.920 (2012). The claimant bears the burden at the first four steps to prove by a preponderance of the evidence that they are disabled. See Freeman v. Barnhart, 274 F.3d 606, 608 (1st Cir. 2001); Mandziej v. Chater, 944 F. Supp. 121, 129 (D.N.H. 1996). Once a claimant has met their burden at step four to show that they are unable to do past work due to a significant limitation, the Commissioner then has the burden at step five to present evidence of specific jobs in the national economy that the claimant can still perform.

Section 416.920(a)(4) requires disability claims to be evaluated through a five-step sequence, including whether the claimant can perform past work and other work available in the national economy.

Allen v. Social Security Administration · filed 2025-03-10(a)(4)

Social security regulations implement a five-step sequential process to evaluate a disability claim. 20 C.F.R. § 416.920(a)(4). This process requires the Commissioner to consider: (1) whether the claimant is engaged in substantial gainful activity; (2) whether the claimant suffers from a medically determinable severe impairment(s); (3) whether such impairment meets or medically equals a listed impairment set forth in 20 C.F.R. pt. 404, subpt. P, app. 1; (4) whether the claimant can perform her past relevant work considering the Commissioner’s assessment of the claimant’s residual functional capacity (“RFC”); and (5) whether the claimant can perform other work considering the RFC and certain vocational factors. 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1520(a)(4)(i)-(v), 416.920(a)(4)(i)-(v). The claimant bears the burden of proof through step four, but the burden shifts to the Commissioner at step five. Lax v. Astrue, 489 F.3d 1080, 1084 (10th Cir. 2007). If it is determined, at any step of the process, that the claimant is or is not disabled, evaluation under a subsequent step is not necessary. Williams v. Bowen, 844 F.2d 748, 750 (10th Cir. 1988).

Section 416.920 establishes a five-step sequential process for evaluating SSI disability claims, including consideration of substantial gainful activity, severe impairment, listed impairments, past work, and other work.

Perhach v. O'Malley · filed 2025-03-13

The Commissioner uses a five-step process, set forth in 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1520 and 416.920, to evaluate disability insurance and SSI disability claims. First, the [Commissioner] considers whether the claimant is currently engaged in substantial gainful activity. If he is not, the [Commissioner] next considers whether the claimant has a “severe impairment” which significantly limits his physical or mental ability to do basic work activities. If the claimant suffers such an impairment, the third inquiry is whether, based solely on medical evidence, the claimant has an impairment which meets or equals the criteria of an impairment listed in Appendix 1 of the regulations. If the claimant has such an impairment, the [Commissioner] will consider him disabled without considering vocational factors such as age, education, and work experience … Assuming the claimant does not have a listed impairment, the fourth inquiry is whether, despite the claimant’s severe impairment, he has the residual functional capacity to perform his past work. Finally, if the claimant is unable to perform his past work, the [Commissioner] then determines whether there is other work which the claimant can perform. See Selian v. Astrue, 708 F.3d 409, 417 (2d Cir. 2013); see also 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520, and 20 C.F.R. § 416.920.

Section 416.920(a)(4) establishes a sequential five-step inquiry for determining SSI disability, and subsection (a)(4)(ii) requires a finding of no disability when the claimant lacks a severe impairment that meets the duration requirement.

Chaves v. Commissioner of Social Security Administration · filed 2025-03-21(a)(4), (a)(4)(ii)

The Commissioner uses a sequential five-step inquiry to determine whether a claimant is disabled, and thus entitled to benefits. See Mills v. Apfel, 244 F.3d 1, 2 (1st Cir. 2001); see also 20 C.F.R. § 416.920(a)(4) (setting forth the five steps applicable to SSI). ... 2. If the applicant does not have a “severe medically determinable physical or mental impairment that [is expected to result in death or has lasted or is expected to last at least twelve continuous months], or a combination of impairments that is severe and meets the duration requirement,” then the applicant is found not to be disabled, and the application is denied. 20 C.F.R. § 416.920(a)(4)(ii); see id. § 416.909 (setting the twelve-month duration requirement).

Section 416.920(a)(4) requires an ALJ to determine disability through five sequential questions addressing current work, severe impairment, listed impairment, past work, and other work.

Flowers v. Bisignano · filed 2025-06-12(a)(4)

To determine whether a plaintiff is disabled, the ALJ considers the following five questions, known as “steps,” in order: (1) Is the plaintiff presently unemployed? (2) Does the plaintiff have a severe impairment? (3) Does the impairment meet or medically equal one of a list of specific impairments enumerated in the regulations? (4) Is the plaintiff unable to perform his former occupation? and (5) Is the plaintiff unable to perform any other work? 20 C.F.R. § 416.920(a)(4).

Section 416.920(a)(4) requires disability claims to be evaluated through a five-step sequence, including consideration of severe impairments at step two and the claimant’s ability to perform past or other work at later steps.

RIVERA v. DUDEK · filed 2025-06-23(a)(4)

A five-step sequential analysis is used to evaluate a disability claim: First, the Commissioner considers whether the claimant is currently engaged in substantial gainful activity. If she is not, then the Commissioner considers in the second step whether the claimant has a “severe impairment” that significantly limits her physical or mental ability to perform basic work activities. If the claimant suffers a severe impairment, the third inquiry is whether, based on the medical evidence, the impairment meets the criteria of the impairment listed in the “listing of impairments,” . . . which result in a presumption of disability, or whether the claimant retains the capacity to work. If the impairment does not meet the criteria for a listed impairment, then the Commissioner assesses in the fourth step whether, despite the severe impairment, the claimant has the residual functional capacity to perform her past work. If the claimant cannot perform her past work, then the final step is to determine whether there is other work in the national economy that the claimant can perform. Sykes v. Apfel, 228 F.3d 259, 262-63 (3d Cir. 2000); see also 20 C.F.R. § 416.920(a)(4). ... Accordingly, the Court remands this matter for consideration of Petitioner’s bipolar II disorder at step two and, as appropriate, at the ensuing steps of the sequential analysis.

Section 416.920(a)(4) requires ALJs to evaluate disability claims through five steps in a set order and proceed to the next step only when the current step does not resolve whether the claimant is disabled.

(SS) Allmon v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2025-08-25(a)(4)

ALJs commit to evaluating SSI applications through five steps that they “follow in a set order.” 20 C.F.R. § 416.920(a)(4). They must proceed to the next step if and only if they cannot determine whether the claimant is or is not disabled at the current step. Id.

Section 416.920(a)(4) requires disability claims to be evaluated through five sequential steps, including determining at step two whether the claimant has a severe impairment.

Arnold v. O'Malley · filed 2025-08-26(a)(4)

In making this determination at the administrative level, the ALJ follows a five-step sequential evaluation process. 20 C.F.R. §416.920(a). Under this process, the ALJ must sequentially determine whether: (1) the claimant is engaged in substantial gainful activity; (2) the claimant has a severe impairment; (3) the claimant’s impairment meets or equals a listed impairment; (4) the claimant is able to do his or her past relevant work; and (5) the claimant is able to do any other work, considering his or her age, education, work experience and residual functional capacity (“RFC”). 20 C.F.R. §416.920(a)(4).

At step two, a claimant must have a severe impairment meeting the duration requirement, or a severe combination of impairments, and once one severe impairment is found, the ALJ must proceed through the remaining steps.

Burgess v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2025-09-22(a)(4)(ii)

At the second step in the sequential evaluation process a claimant must demonstrate he suffers from a “severe medically determinable physical or mental impairment that meets the duration requirement . . . or a combination of impairments that is severe and meets the duration requirement . . .” 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1520(a)(4)(ii), 416.920(a)(4)(ii); Social Security Ruling 16-3p, 2017 WL 5180304, at *11 (Oct. 25, 2017); Higgs v. Bowen, 880 F.2d 860, 863 (6th Cir. 1988) (per curiam). According to the regulations, upon determining that a claimant has at least one severe impairment, the ALJ must continue with the remaining steps in the sequential evaluation process. Maziarz v. Sec’y of Health & Hum. Servs., 837 F.2d 240, 244 (6th Cir. 1987).

Section 416.920(d) requires the third step of the disability inquiry to determine whether the claimant's impairment meets or medically equals a listed impairment.

Jimenez v. Bisignano · filed 2025-09-29(d)

The Commissioner has established a five-step determination whether an individual is disabled as defined by the Social Security Act. 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1520, 416.920. ... The third step of the five-step test employed by the ALJ requires a determination of whether the Plaintiff has an impairment listed in Appendix 1 of the Social Security Regulations. 20 C.F.R. § 404, Subpt. P, App. 1. ... The ALJ’s conclusion that there were no extreme or marked limitations was supported by substantial evidence and thus there was no error at step three.

Section 416.920 requires the Commissioner to determine disability through a five-step sequential evaluation, including assessing substantial gainful activity, severe impairments, listed impairments, residual functional capacity and past work, and the ability to perform other work in the national economy.

Hernandez v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2025-09-30(a) (b) (c) (d) (e) (g)

The Commissioner must follow a five-step sequential evaluation to determine whether a claimant is disabled within the meaning of the Act. 20 C.F.R. § 416.920(a). At step one, the claimant must demonstrate that he is not engaging in substantial gainful activity. 20 C.F.R. § 416.920(b). At step two, the claimant must demonstrate that he has a severe impairment or combination of impairments that limits the claimant’s ability to perform physical or mental work-related activities. 20 C.F.R. § 416.920(c). If the impairment meets or medically equals the criteria of a disabling impairment as set forth in Appendix 1 of Subpart P of Regulation No. 4 (the “Listings”), and satisfies the durational requirement, the claimant is entitled to disability benefits. 20 C.F.R. § 416.920(d). If the impairment does not meet the criteria of a disabling impairment, the Commissioner considers whether the claimant has sufficient Residual Functional Capacity (“RFC”), for the claimant to return to past relevant work. 20 C.F.R. § 416.920(e)-(f). If the claimant is unable to return to past relevant work, the burden of proof shifts to the Commissioner to demonstrate that she could perform other jobs which exist in significant numbers in the national economy, based on claimant’s age, education and work experience. 20 C.F.R. § 416.920(g).

Section 416.920(a) requires a five-step sequential evaluation of disability, including determining at step two whether the claimant has a severe medically determinable impairment or combination of impairments.

Cargile v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2025-10-07(a)

At step two of the sequential evaluation process, the ALJ must determine whether the claimant has a medically determinable impairment that is severe or a combination of impairments that are severe. 20 C.F.R. § 416.920(a)(4)(ii), (c).

Section 416.920 requires a five-step disability evaluation, and a step-three severity finding need not be carried over verbatim into the step-four residual functional capacity assessment, but apparent inconsistencies require remand when the court cannot discern or reconcile the ALJ's reasoning.

Grover v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2025-09-29(a) (b) (c) (d) (e)

It is well established that a step 3 determination is not an RFC assessment, but a means of rating the severity of a mental impairment. Lynessa M. V. Comm’r of Soc. Sec., 20-CV-971, 2021 WL 4437184, at *5 (W.D.N.Y. Sept. 28, 2021). Because the two determinations require distinct analysis and apply different standards, a determination made at step 3 need not carry over verbatim to the ultimate RFC determination. Brandiann B. V. Comm’r of Soc. Sec., 22-CV-633, 2025 WL 405817, at *7 (W.D.N.Y. Feb. 5, 2025); See Chappell v. Comm’r of Soc. Sec., 18-CV-1384, 2020 WL 1921222, at *6 (W.D.N.Y. April 21, 2020) (“While the analysis at steps two and three concerns the functional effects of mental impairments, the RFC analysis at step four specifically considers work-related physical and mental activities in a work setting.”). As a result, apparent inconsistencies between a step 3 finding and an RFC determination warrants remand only if the Court is unable to discern the ALJ’s reasoning or reconcile the inconsistent findings.

Section 416.920 requires disability claims to be evaluated through five sequential steps, with the claimant bearing the burden through step four and the Commissioner at step five.

Cox-Bottoson · filed 2025-11-17(b)-(f)

The Commissioner follows a five-step evaluation process found at 20 C.F.R. § 416.920 to determine whether a claimant is disabled: ... Under this five-step sequential analysis, the claimant has the burden of proof in Steps One through Four. Walters v. Comm’r of Soc. Sec., 127 F.3d 525, 529 (6th Cir. 1997). The burden shifts to the Commissioner at Step Five. Id. Only if a claimant satisfies each element of the analysis, including inability to do other work, and meets the duration requirements, is she determined to be disabled. 20 C.F.R. § 416.920(b)-(f); see also Walters, 127 F.3d at 529.

Section 416.920(a)(4) requires disability claims to be evaluated through a five-step sequence addressing work activity, impairment severity, listed impairments, past work, and other work in the national economy.

Hartle · filed 2025-11-18(a)(4)

Acting pursuant to its statutory rulemaking authority (42 U.S.C. § 405(a)), the Social Security Administration (“SSA”) promulgated regulations establishing a five-step sequential evaluation process to determine disability. 20 C.F.R. § 416.920(a)(4) (2015). Under that five-step sequential evaluation process, the decision-maker determines: (1) whether the claimant is currently engaged in substantial gainful activity; (2) whether the claimant has a severe impairment or combination of impairments; (3) whether the impairment meets or ... ... equals the severity of the specified impairments in the Listing of Impairments; (4) based on a “residual functional capacity” assessment, whether the claimant can perform any of his or her past relevant work despite the impairment; and (5) whether there are significant numbers of jobs in the national economy that the claimant can perform given the claimant’s residual functional capacity, age, education, and work experience.

Section 416.920(a) requires the Commissioner to use a five-step sequential evaluation process to determine whether a claimant is disabled.

COLVIN · filed 2025-12-11(a)

Operating through ALJs, the Social Security Commissioner administers a five-step sequential evaluation process to determine whether a claimant is disabled under the Social Security Act. 20 C.F.R. § 416.920(a).

Section 416.920(a)(4) requires the ALJ to assess a claimant’s residual functional capacity after the listing inquiry and before deciding whether the claimant can perform past relevant work or other work.

Kyoko M. H. v. Bisignano · filed 2026-01-20(a)(4)

If the claimant’s impairments do not meet or equal a “listed impairment,” before proceeding to the fourth step the ALJ assesses the claimant’s RFC, that is, what the claimant can do on a sustained basis despite the limitations from her impairments. See 20 C.F.R. § 416.920(a)(4); Social Security Ruling (“SSR”) 96-8p, 1996 WL 374184 (July 2, 1996). After assessing the RFC, the ALJ proceeds to the fourth step to determine if, in light of the claimant’s RFC, the claimant can perform past relevant work as actually or generally performed.

Section 416.920(a)(1) requires disability claims to be evaluated through a sequential five-step process, under which a claimant who can perform past relevant work at step four is not disabled.

Buck · filed 2026-03-09(a)(1), (a)(4)(iv)

To implement that definition, the Social Security Administration has developed a five-step evaluation process. See 20 C.F.R. § 416.920(a)(1). The steps proceed sequentially: Step One. Is the claimant currently engaged in substantial gainful activity? Step Two. Does the claimant have a severe mental or physical impairment—i.e., an impairment that significantly limits their ability to do basic work activities—or a combination of them? Step Three. Does the mental or physical impairment appear on an enumerated list (called “listings”)? If not, is it nonetheless medically equal to one of those listings? RFC Assessment. What is the claimant’s residual functional capacity (RFC)—that is, the most they can still do despite their limitations? Step Four. Based on the claimant’s RFC, can they perform their past work? Step Five. Based on the claimant’s RFC, can they perform other work? See id. § 416.920(a)(4)(i)–(v). The ALJ begins, of course, at step one. If it yields an affirmative answer (i.e., the claimant is working), the claimant is not disabled, and the inquiry ends. If step two yields a negative answer (i.e., the claimant does not have a severe impairment), the claimant is not disabled, and the inquiry ends. See id. §416.920(a)(4)(i)–(ii). Step three, however, is dispositive: If the claimant’s impairment appears on a listing, the claimant is considered disabled and eligible for benefits. See id. § 416.920(a)(4)(iii). If the claimant’s impairment does not appear on or medically equal a listing, the ALJ crafts an “RFC Assessment,” which analyzes “the claimant’s ability to do physical and mental work activities on a regular and continuing basis despite limitations from [their] impairment.” Moore v. Colvin, 743 F.3d 1118, 1121 (7th Cir. 2014). If either steps four or five yield an affirmative answer (i.e., the claimant can perform their old job or adjust to a new one in light of the RFC), the claimant is not disabled. See 20 C.F.R. § 416.920(a)(4)(iv)–(v).

Section 416.920 requires a five-step sequential evaluation, under which a claimant who can perform past work at step four is not disabled.

Keenan · filed 2026-04-29(a)(1), (a)(4)(iv)

To implement that definition, the Social Security Administration has developed a five-step evaluation process. See 20 C.F.R. § 416.920(a)(1). ... The steps proceed sequentially: ... Step Four. Based on the claimant’s RFC, can they perform their past work? ... See id. § 416.920(a)(4)(i)–(v). ... If either steps four or five yield an affirmative answer (i.e., the claimant can perform their old job or adjust to a new one in light of the RFC), the claimant is not disabled. See 20 C.F.R. § 416.920(a)(4)(iv)–(v).

Section 416.920(a)(4) requires the Commissioner to use a five-step framework to decide whether a claimant is disabled.

Nelson v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2022-09-30(a)(4)

In deciding whether a claimant is disabled, the Commissioner is required by the Social Security regulations to use the five-step framework set forth in 20 CFR § 416.920(a)(4).

At step five, the ALJ considers whether a claimant can adjust to other work given the claimant’s residual functional capacity and other relevant factors.

Clements v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2024-04-08(a)(4)(v)

To reach that decision, the ALJ correctly applied the five-step sequential analysis, crafted an RFC at the fourth step of the analysis that is supported by substantial evidence in the record, and properly relied on the testimony of a vocational expert to determine at the fifth step that Plaintiff, despite his limitations, could perform work that exists in significant numbers in the national economy.

Section 416.920 requires findings at each step of the five-step sequential evaluation process when a claim is reconsidered on remand.

Vargas v. Kijakazi · filed 2022-08-17(a)(4)

On remand, the ALJ shall reevaluate the medical evidence of record, making findings on each of the ... five steps of the sequential evaluation process, and take into consideration any other evidence or testimony relevant to Plaintiff’s disability claim.

At step two, § 416.920(a)(4)(ii) requires the ALJ to decide whether the claimant’s impairments, alone or in combination, significantly limit basic work abilities; an erroneous non-severe finding is harmless if the ALJ identifies another severe impairment and continues the sequential evaluation.

Johnson v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2024-02-29(a)(4)(ii)

At step two of the sequential evaluation process, the ALJ considers the medical severity of a claimant’s impairments. 20 C.F.R. § 416.920(a)(4)(ii). The ALJ must determine whether the impairments, alone or in combination, significantly limit the claimant’s physical or mental ability to do basic work skills. ... If an ALJ errs in finding that an impairment is non-severe at step two, such error is harmless if the ALJ finds that the claimant has any severe impairment and continues in the sequential evaluation process.

Section 416.920(c) treats an impairment as severe when it significantly limits a claimant’s physical or mental ability to perform basic work activities.

Stephanie P. v. O'Malley · filed 2024-02-05(c)

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). The Commissioner has adopted a “slight abnormality” standard which provides that an impairment is “non-severe” when the medical evidence establishes only a slight abnormality that has “no more than a minimal effect on an individual’s ability to work.” SSR 85-28.

Section 416.920(a)(4)(ii) requires consideration of impairment severity at Step 2, and an error in finding an impairment non-severe is harmless when the ALJ proceeds through Step 5.

Broomfield v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2023-09-29(a)(4)(ii)

At Step 2, an ALJ considers the severity of a claimant’s impairments. 20 C.F.R. § 416.920(a)(4)(ii). The Step 2 inquiry “acts as a filter” so that insubstantial impairments will not be given much weight. Tuggerson-Brown v. Comm’r of Soc. Sec., 572 F. App’x 949, 950 (11th Cir. 2014) (citation omitted). Although the standard for severity is low, the severity of an impairment “‘must be measured in terms of its effect upon ability to work.’” D’Andrea v. Comm’r of Soc. Sec. Admin., 389 F. App’x 944, 945 (11th Cir. 2010) (citation omitted). Additionally, the finding of any severe impairment is sufficient to satisfy Step 2 of the sequential analysis. Griffin v. Comm’r of Soc. Sec., 560 F. App’x 837, 841-42 (11th Cir. 2014) (citations omitted). Thus, any error in finding Plaintiff’s gastrointestinal impairments not severe was harmless in that the ALJ proceeded through Step 5 of the analysis. Griffin, 560 F. App’x at 841-42 (citations omitted).

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

Springer v. Berryhill · filed 2020-07-13(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. 20 C.F.R. § 416.920(a)(4)(ii); SSR 85-28, 1985 WL 56856.

Section 416.920 treats an impairment as severe at Step 2 only when it significantly limits a claimant’s physical or mental ability to do basic work activities, and permits the ALJ to base that determination on medical evidence supporting a severe medically determinable impairment.

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, § 416.920 requires a claimant to show a severe impairment meeting the Act’s durational requirement; an impairment is severe when it has more than a minimal impact on basic work activities.

LAPOINTE v. SOCIAL SECURITY ADMINISTRATION COMMISSIONER · filed 2020-09-30(a)(4)(ii), (c)

At step 2 of the sequential evaluation process, a claimant must demonstrate the existence of impairments that are “severe” from a vocational perspective, and that the impairments meet the durational requirement of the Social Security Act. 20 C.F.R. § 416.920(a)(4)(ii). The step 2 requirement of “severe” impairment imposes a de minimis burden, designed merely to screen groundless claims. McDonald v. Sec’y of HHS, 795 F.2d 1118, 1123 (1st Cir. 1986). An impairment or combination of impairments is not severe when the medical evidence “establishes only a slight abnormality or combination of slight abnormalities which would have no more than a minimal effect on an individual’s ability to work even if the individual’s age, education, or work experience were specifically considered.” Id. at 1124 (quoting Social Security Ruling 85–28). In other words, an impairment is severe if it has more than a minimal impact on the claimant’s ability to perform basic work activities on a regular and continuing basis. Id.

At step two, an impairment is severe only if it significantly limits the claimant’s ability to perform basic work activities, and the claimant bears the burden of showing a medically determinable impairment that meets this threshold.

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). ... At Step 2, Plaintiff bore the burden of demonstrating that he had a “medically determinable” physical or mental impairment(s) that significantly limited his ability to do basic work activity at the relevant time. Id. The ALJ found that Plaintiff did not meet that burden as to his mental impairments, and Plaintiff has shown no error in his findings.

Section 416.920(c) requires an alleged impairment to significantly limit basic work activities to satisfy the step-two severity threshold.

Whitney v. Barnhart · filed 2003-03-24(c)

In the terminology of the controlling regulations, an alleged impairment must “significantly limit[]” some “basic work activities” in order to be deemed sufficiently severe to satisfy the threshold standard for consideration imposed at step two in the analysis. 20 C.F.R. § 416.920(c).

Section 416.920(a)(4)(ii) requires the ALJ, at step two, to determine whether the claimant has any medically determinable impairments that are severe.

Hines v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2021-12-20(a)(4)(ii)

At step two, the ALJ must determine if the claimant suffers from any medically determinable impairments that are “severe.” 20 C.F.R. § 416.920(a)(4)(ii).

At step two, § 416.920(c) requires an impairment to significantly limit a claimant's physical or mental ability to do basic work activities to be considered severe.

Valley v. SSA · filed 2003-09-30(c)

At step two of the five-step sequential analysis, claimant bears the burden of demonstrating that she has an impairment (or impairments) "which significantly limits [her] physical or mental ability to do basic work activities." 20 C.F.R. § 416.920(c). Claimant asserts that the ALJ's determination that her depression and anxiety are "not severe" is not supported by substantial evidence in the record. The court disagrees.

Section 416.920 establishes a five-step disability evaluation, and at step two the agency applies a de minimis standard to determine whether medical evidence shows any limitation in the claimant's ability to perform basic work-related activity.

Brooks v. Rhode Island Department of Human Services, 03-1125 (2004) · filed 2004-04-22

At the second stage of the evaluation process, DHS considers the medical severity of an applicant's impairment.20 C.F.R. § 416.920. Step two is a de minimis standard in which the agency determines whether the medical evidence demonstrates that the claimant has any limitations in his or her ability to perform basic work-related activity. Samuels, Social Security DisabilityClaims: Practice Procedure § 22:61 (2d ed. 1994); Bowen, 482 U.S. at 153, 107 S.Ct. at 2297, 96 L. Ed.2d at 134.

Section 416.920 requires the ALJ at step two to assess whether impairments are severe, both individually and in combination with the claimant’s other impairments.

Stemple v. Astrue · filed 2007-02-26(a)

At step two of the five-step sequential analysis, the ALJ must consider the severity of an impairment both individually and in combination with a claimant’s other impairments. See 20 C.F.R. § 416.920. See also 20 C.F.R. § 416.923 (“We will consider the combined effect of all of your impairments without regard to whether any such impairment, if considered separately, would be of sufficient severity”); Cook, 783 F.2d at 1174 (the Agency “must make a specific and well-articulated finding as to the effect of the combination of impairments”) (citations omitted). The Fourth Circuit has held that an impairment is “severe” unless it “has such minimal effect on the individual that it would not be expected to interfere with the individual’s ability to work, irrespective of age, education, or work experience.”

At step two of the sequential evaluation, an impairment must be severe and satisfy the applicable duration requirement.

Richter v. R.I. Dept. of Human Serv. · filed 2007-05-30(a)(4)(ii)

Under the second step, the impairment must be severe and must fulfill the duration requirement of 20 C.F.R. § 416.909. See20 C.F.R. § 416.920(a)(4)(ii).

At step two of the five-step disability evaluation, an impairment is not severe if it has no more than a minimal effect on the claimant’s ability to perform basic work activities.

Kirby v. Astrue · filed 2007-09-11(a)(4)

The Commissioner uses a five-step evaluation to determine if a claimant is disabled. ... Step two of the evaluation states that a claimant is not disabled if his impairments are not “severe.” ... If the impairment would have no more than a minimal effect on the claimant’s ability to work, then it does not satisfy the requirement of step two. ... Accordingly, the ALJ permissibly found that Kirby’s impairments were not severe, and that Kirby was not disabled..

At step two, § 416.920 treats an impairment as nonsevere only when it has no more than a minimal effect on the claimant’s ability to perform basic work activities.

Holzberg v. Astrue · filed 2010-01-11(a)(4)(iii), (c)

At step two of the sequential disability evaluation process, the ALJ must determine if an impairment is “severe.” 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520, § 416.920. Id. An impairment is “not severe” if it does not “significantly limit” a claimant’s mental or physical abilities to do basic work activities. 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520(a)(4)(iii), (c), § 416.920(a)(4)(iii), (c); SSR 96-3p, 1996 WL 374181 *1. ... The record contains ample objective medical evidence of more than de minimis mental functional limitations stemming at least in part from plaintiffs depression. ... These limitations clearly would affect plaintiffs ability to do basic work activities. The ALJ thus erred in failing to conclude that plaintiffs depression was severe.

At step two, an impairment is severe when it significantly limits a claimant’s ability to perform basic work activities; a slight abnormality with only a minimal effect on the ability to work is not severe.

Mims v. Astrue · filed 2010-03-23(c)

At step two of the analysis, an ALJ considers whether the claimant has a medically determinable impairment or combination of impairments that are severe. 20 C.F.R. § 416.920(c). Severeness is determined by whether the impairment or combination of impairments significantly limits the claimant’s ability to perform basic work activities; an impairment or combination of impairments is not severe when evidence establishes only a slight abnormality that would only have a minimal effect on the claimant’s ability to work. 20 C.F.R. § 416.921; Social Security Ruling (“SSR”) 85-28, 1985 WL 56856 (S.S.A. 1985); SSR 96-3p, 1996 WL 374181 (S.S.A. July 2,1996); SSR 96-4p, 1996 WL 374187 (S.S.A. July 2,1996). ... Here, however, upon review of the complete record, the court finds that the ALJ’s decision at step two was not supported by substantial evidence. ... Therefore, the court overturns the decision of the ALJ at step two and finds that Plaintiffs mental impairment meets the legal standard for a severe impairment.

Section 416.920(c) requires an ALJ at step two to determine whether an impairment significantly limits the claimant’s physical or mental ability to perform basic work activities.

Fisher v. Astrue · filed 2011-04-20(c)

At step two of the sequential process, the ALJ must determine whether Plaintiff suffers from a “severe” impairment, i.e., one that significantly limits his or her physical or mental ability to do basic work activities. 20 C.F.R. § 416.920(c).

Section 416.920(a)(4)(ii) provides that when a mental impairment is found not severe at step two, the claimant is found not disabled and the sequential evaluation does not continue to the next step.

Stratton v. Astrue · filed 2011-06-16(a)(4)(ii)

In fact, the ALJ would not have been required to consider either disorder further if he had not found them to be severe at step two. See 20 C.F.R. § 416.920(a)(4)(ii) (if mental impairment is found not severe at step two, claimant will be found not disabled, and Commissioner will not go on to next step in sequential evaluation process); see also Simmons v. Massanari, 264 F.3d 751, 755 (8th Cir. 2001) (sequential evaluation process may be ended at step two when impairment or combination of impairments would have no more than minimal effect on claimant’s ability to work).

At step two, an impairment need not be separately labeled severe when the claimant has another severe impairment and the evaluation proceeds, but all impairments must still be considered in assessing ability to work.

McMurtry v. Astrue · filed 2010-10-27(c)

For the purposes of fulfilling step two of the sequential five-step disability determination process, it is irrelevant whether the ALJ considered additional impairments, as he found in McMurtry’s favor at that step. However, this court will address these arguments in section (6) as they relate to McMurtry’s RFC.

At step two, an impairment is severe only if it significantly limits the claimant’s physical or mental ability to perform basic work activities; a minimal effect is insufficient.

Meyerpeter v. Astrue · filed 2012-10-05(c)

Second, the claimant must have a severe impairment. 20 C.F.R. §§ 416.920(c), 404.1520(c). The Social Security Act defines “severe impairment” as “any impairment or combination of impairments which significantly limits [claimant’s] physical or mental ability to do basic work activities .... ” Id. ... This is not the correct standard. To be considered severe, an impairment must significantly limit a claimant’s ability to do basic work activities. See 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520(c). ... Based on the foregoing, the Court finds that substantial evidence in the record as a whole supports the ALJ’s finding that Meyerpeter’s heart palpitations were not a severe impairment.

Section 416.920(a)(4)(ii) requires the ALJ, at step two of the disability determination, to determine the medical severity of the claimant's impairments.

Brown v. SSA · filed 2013-06-28(a)(4)(ii)

At the second step of the disability determinationprocess, the ALJ determines the medical severity of a claimant's impairments. 20 C.F.R. § 416.920 (a)(4)(ii).

Section 416.920(c) requires evidence that a medically determinable impairment significantly limits a claimant’s physical or mental ability to perform basic work activities for at least 12 consecutive months to establish a severe impairment at step two.

Springer v. Colvin · filed 2014-07-07(c)

At step two of the sequential evaluation process, the ALJ must determine whether the claimant has a “severe” impairment. See 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1520(c), 416.920(c). The fact that a claimant has been diagnosed with and treated for a medically determinable impairment does not necessarily mean the impairment is “severe,” as defined by the Social Security Regulations. See, e.g., Fair v. Bowen, 885 F.2d 597, 603 (9th Cir.1989); Key v. Heckler, 754 F.2d 1545, 1549-50 (9th Cir.1985). To establish severity, the evidence must show the diagnosed impairment significantly limits a claimant’s physical or mental ability to do basic work activities for at least 12 consecutive months. 20 C.F.R. § 416.920(c).

At Step Two, § 416.920 requires the Commissioner to determine whether an impairment is severe, meaning it significantly limits the claimant’s ability to perform basic work activities; an impairment with no more than a minimal effect on the ability to work is not severe.

Gann v. Colvin · filed 2015-03-18(a)(4)(ii), (c)

At Step Two, the ALJ must consider whether a medically determinable impairment is “severe.” 20 C.F.R. § 416.920(a)(4)(ii). A severe impairment is one which “significantly limits [the claimant’s] physical or mental ability to do basic work activities.” 20 C.F.R. § 416.920(c). ... As such, the ALJ did not err at Step Two by concluding that migraine headaches and fibromyalgia are not severe impairments.

Section 416.920(c) treats an impairment as severe when it significantly limits a claimant's ability to conduct basic work activities at Step Two.

Jimmeson v. Berryhill · filed 2017-03-20(c)

Impairments are considered severe when they significantly limit a plaintiffs “ability to conduct basic work activities.” 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520(c); see 20 C.F.R. § 416.920(c). ... Plaintiffs bipolar and impulse control disorder easily meet this de minimis standard. ... Because there is substantial evidence that plaintiff suffers from bipolar disorder and impulse control disorder, the ALJ should have included those impairments at Step Two.

At step two, the regulation requires an ALJ to assess the medical severity of the claimant’s impairments and find the claimant not disabled if no severe impairment exists; an impairment is severe if it significantly limits basic work activities.

Davis v. Berryhill · filed 2017-08-07(a)(4)(ii)

At step two, an ALJ is required to “consider the medical severity” of a claimant’s impairments. 20 C.F.R. § 416.920(a)(4)(ii). If the ALJ determines that a claimant does not “have a severe medically determinable physical or mental impairment,” the ALJ will find the claimant not disabled. Id. To qualify as severe under the regulations, an impairment must “sig-nificantly limit[]” a claimant’s ability to do basic work activities. Id.

At step two, § 416.920(c) requires a medically determinable impairment to significantly limit the claimant’s physical or mental ability to perform basic work activities to be considered severe.

Sullivan v. Berryhill · filed 2018-07-10(c)

A step-two severity finding requires plaintiff to show that his medically determinable impairment significantly limits his physical or mental ability to do basic work activities. 20 C.F.R. §§ 416.920(c), 416.921.

At step two, an impairment is severe only if it significantly limits a claimant’s physical or mental ability to do basic work activities; the severity screen is de minimis and is intended to exclude only groundless claims.

Sullivan v. Commissioner of Social Security Administration · filed 2018-07-10(c)

A step-two severity finding requires plaintiff to show that his medically determinable impairment significantly limits his physical or mental ability to do basic work activities. 20 C.F.R. §§ 416.920(c), 416.921. The parties agree that this regulation is “a de minimis policy, designed to do no more than screen out groundless claims.” McDonald v. Sec’y of Health & Human Servs., 795 F.2d 1118, 1124 (1st Cir. 1986) (“[A] finding of ‘non-severe’ is only to be made where ‘medical evidence establishes only a slight abnormality or combination of slight abnormalities which would have no more than a minimal effect on an individual's ability to work even if the individual's age, education, or work experience were specifically considered . . .’” (quoting Social Security Ruling 85-28)).

At step two, the agency evaluates the medical severity of a claimant’s impairments; an impairment is severe only if it significantly limits basic work activities and satisfies the duration requirement.

Gonzalez v. Berryhill · filed 2018-09-17(a)(4)(ii)

“At the second step, [the agency] consider[s] the medical severity of your impairment(s).” 20 CFR § 416.920(a)(4)(ii). “It is the claimant’s burden to establish that [her] impairment or combination of impairments are severe.” Kirby v. Astrue, 500 F.3d 705, 707 (8th Cir. 2007). A severe impairment is defined as one which significantly limits a physical or mental ability to do basic work activities. 20 CFR § 416.905. An impairment is not severe, however, if it “amounts to only a slight abnormality that would not significantly limit the claimant’s physical or mental ability to do basic work activities.” Kirby, 500 F.3d at 707. “If the impairment would have no more than a minimal effect on the claimant’s ability to work, then it does not satisfy the requirement of step two.” Id. (citation omitted). Additionally, the impairment must have lasted at least twelve months or be expected to result in death. See 20 CFR § 416.905.

Section 416.920's step-two evaluation treats an impairment as non-severe when it is only a slight abnormality with no more than a minimal effect on basic work activities; a severe mental impairment must significantly limit those activities, and the claimant bears the burden of proof.

Sedlak v. Saul · filed 2019-08-08(a)(4), (c)

Step two of the Commissioner’s five-step evaluation to determine if a claimant is disabled states that a claimant is not disabled if his impairments are not “severe.” 20 C.F.R. § 416.920(a)(4). 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. If the impairment would have no more than a minimal effect on the claimant’s ability to work, then it does not satisfy the requirement of step two. ... A severe mental impairment must “significantly” limit the claimant’s “mental ability to do basic work activities,” 20 C.F.R. § 416.920(c), such as understanding, carrying out, and remembering simple instructions; using judgment; responding appropriately to supervision, co-workers, and usual work situations; and dealing with changes in a routine work setting. 20 C.F.R. §§ 416.922(b)(1)-(6). ... Under these circumstances, Sedlak failed to meet his burden to prove that a learning disorder or borderline intellectual functioning significantly limits his mental ability to do basic work activities, and the ALJ properly characterized this alleged mental impairment as non-severe.

Section 416.920(c) treats an impairment as severe at step two only when it significantly limits basic work activities and meets the required duration; once a severe impairment is found, the evaluation proceeds to the next step.

UPSHER v. BERRYHILL · filed 2019-08-12(c)

The question of severity relies not on the particular condition, but on the limitations stemming from that condition. ... To be clear, an impairment is not severe if it does not significantly limit the physical or mental ability to do basic work activities and/or does not last or is not expected to last for a continuous period of at least 12 months. 20 C.F.R. §416.920(c), §416.921(a); §416.909, 42 U.S.C. §423(d). If a claimant is found to have a severe impairment, then the ALJ proceeds to the next step. 20 C.F.R. §416.920(a). ... In this case, the ALJ found certain impairments to be severe. (ECF No. 8-2, p. 15). The ALJ then proceeded to the next steps. (ECF No. 8-2, pp. 16-24). Thus, Plaintiff was not denied benefits at step 2. Rather, the ALJ proceeded beyond step 2. ... Therefore, I find any purported error was harmless such that a remand on this basis is not warranted.

Section 416.920(c) requires a medically determinable impairment to significantly limit basic work activities for at least 12 consecutive months to be severe, while subsection (d) provides that a claimant qualifies at step three when the impairment meets or equals a listed impairment.

Wilson v. Commissioner of Social Security Administration · filed 2019-08-28(c) (d)

To establish severity, the evidence must show the diagnosed impairment significantly limited the claimant’s physical or mental ability to do basic work activities for at least 12 consecutive months. 20 C.F.R. § 416.920(c). ... “If the claimant’s impairment matches or is ‘equal’ to one of the listed impairments, he qualifies for benefits without further inquiry.” Id. (citing 20 C.F.R. § 416.920(d)).

Section 416.920(a)(4)(ii) requires a Step Two assessment of the medical severity of a claimant's impairment, and the disability analysis should terminate there when the evidence does not establish a severe impairment.

Watkins v. Social Security Administration Commissioner · filed 2019-08-29(a)(4)(ii)

Before discussing the RFC issue at Step Four, the Court will begin its analysis by considering the ALJ’s treatment of Step Two, which required an assessment as to “the medical severity of [the claimant's] impairment(s),” 20 C.F.R. § 416.920(a)(4)(ii). ... The Court acknowledges that the standard for evaluating the severity of a claimed impairment in Step Two is de minimus in nature, see Bowen v. Yuckert, 482 U.S. 137, 154 (1987)—“but it is also not a toothless standard ....” Kirby v. Astrue, 500 F.3d 705, 708 (8th Cir. 2007). An impairment is not severe when the medical evidence of record shows that it has “no more than a minimal effect on the claimant's ability to work.” Hudson v. Bowen, 870 F.2d 1392, 1396 (8th Cir. 1989). In the case at bar, making a finding of severity at Step Two was impossible due to: (1) the lack of objective and subjective medical evidence of an impairment or combination of impairments during the relevant time period and (2) the lack of evidence that such impairments affected Mr. Watkins's ability to work during the relevant time period. Accordingly, the Court believes the ALJ should have terminated the analysis at Step Two and not given Mr. Watkins the benefit of the doubt that his impairments were severe before moving on to Step Four.

Section 416.920(c) treats an impairment as severe only when it significantly limits a claimant’s physical or mental ability to perform basic work activities.

Mercado v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2019-09-13(c)

A severe impairment is an impairment that significantly limits the claimant’s physical or mental ability to do basic work activities. 20 C.F.R. § 416.920(c). ... Based on the forgoing, the ALJ’s finding that Plaintiff’s migraines are nonsevere is reasonable and based on substantial evidence.

At step two, an impairment is severe only if it significantly limits a claimant's physical or mental ability to perform basic work activities.

Brown v. Commissioner of Social Security Administration · filed 2019-09-17(c)

At the second step of the disability analysis, the claimant has the burden to show that she suffers from a severe medically determinable physical or mental impairment. ... A severe impairment is one that “significantly limits your physical or mental ability to do basic work activities.” 20 C.F.R. § 416.920(c). ... The court finds that the ALJ’s determination that Brown’s stroke was not a severe impairment is supported by substantial evidence.

At step two, an impairment is severe when it significantly limits a claimant’s physical or mental ability to perform basic work activities.

Schwalje v. Saul · filed 2019-09-20(c)

Second, the claimant must have a “severe impairment,” defined as “any impairment or combination of impairments which significantly limits [claimant’s] physical or mental ability to do basic work activities.” 20 C.F.R. §§ 416.920(c), 404.1520(c). ... The Court finds the ALJ’s failure to find Plaintiff’s bipolar disorder severe at step two was not harmless error, and reversal and remand on that basis is warranted.

At step two, § 416.920(c) asks whether a claimant has a severe impairment or combination of impairments that significantly limits the ability to perform basic work activities.

Wagner v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2019-09-23(c)

Step two asks whether the claimant has a severe impairment, or combination of impairments, that significantly limits the claimant’s physical or mental ability to do basic work activities. 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1520(c), 416.920(c).

Section 416.920(a)(4) requires the ALJ to determine at step two whether the claimant has a medically determinable impairment or combination of impairments that is severe.

Bruns v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2019-08-16(a)(4)

At step two of the sequential evaluation process, the ALJ must gauge whether the claimant has a medically determinable impairment (or combination of impairments) that is severe.

Section 416.920(a)(4)(ii) requires the SSA to determine at step two whether each impairment claimed to prevent work is severe.

Lyons v. Commissioner, Social Security · filed 2019-08-19(a)(4)(ii)

The ALJ proceeded in accordance with applicable law at the first two steps of the sequential evaluation. ... At step two, the ALJ then considered the severity of each of the impairments that Plaintiff claimed prevented him from working, finding each impairment to be severe. See Tr. 28-29; 20 C.F.R. § 416.920(a)(4)(ii).

At step two, the regulation requires a severe medically determinable impairment, or combination of impairments, that has lasted or is expected to last continuously for at least 12 months.

Gendron v. Berryhill · filed 2019-08-27(a)(i1)

At step two, the ALJ must determine whether the claimant has a “severe medically determinable physical or mental impairment” or combination of impairments that lasted or was expected to last for a continuous period of at least 12 months. 20 C.F.R. §§ 416.920(a)(i1), 416.909; see also Keyser v. Comm’r Soc. Sec. Admin., 648 F.3d 721, 725 (9th Cir. 2011).

Section 416.920(a)(4)(ii) requires an ALJ at Step Two to determine whether a claimant has a severe medically determinable impairment or combination of impairments.

Strickland v. Commissioner of Social Security Administration · filed 2019-08-30(a)(4)(ii)

At Step Two of the sequential steps for evaluating entitlement to social security benefits, an ALJ considers whether the claimant has a medically determinable physical or mental impairment that is “severe” or a combination of impairments that are “severe.” 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520(a)(4)(ii) & (c); 20 C.F.R. § 416.920(a)(4)(ii) & (c). Social Security regulations establish that after this determination at Step Two, the ALJ must consider all of the claimant’s impairments, both “severe” and “non-severe,” at every sequential step in the process, including in the ALJ’s determination of RFC. See 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520(e), 404.1545, 416.920(e), 416.945, 404.1523(c), 404.1529; SSR 96-8P, 1996 WL 374184, at *5.

At step two, an impairment is severe only if it significantly limits a claimant’s ability to perform basic work activities; the step-two inquiry is a de minimis screen, and an impairment with no more than a minimal effect on the ability to work is not severe.

(SS) Yang v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2019-09-13(c)

At step two of the five-step analysis, the ALJ is required to determine whether a plaintiff has a “severe” medical impairment or combination of impairments. 20 C.F.R. § 416.920(c). An impairment is “severe” if it “significantly limits [the claimant’s] physical or mental ability to do basic work activities.” 20 C.F.R. § § 416.920(c), 416.921(a). The evaluation at step two is a de minimis screening device to dispose of groundless claims. ... An impairment is not severe if the evidence establishes “a slight abnormality that has no more than a minimal effect on an individual[’]s ability to work.” Smolen v. Chater, 80 F.3d 1273, 1290 (9th Cir. 1996) (internal quotations and citations omitted).

At step two, § 416.920(c) requires the agency to decide whether an impairment significantly limits a claimant’s physical or mental ability to perform basic work activities.

Roth v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2019-09-18(c)

At step two, the ALJ must determine whether the claimant has a severe impairment that significantly limits his physical or mental abilities to do basic work activities. 20 C.F.R. § 416.920(c). ... In concluding that plaintiff’s Parkinson’s diagnosis did not constitute a severe impairment, the ALJ reasoned that “[a]n MIR of [plaintiff’s] brain performed in May 2017 showed findings consistent with Parkinson’s disease. However, there is no clinical finding showing tremors or gait abnormality. Therefore, while the MRI showed findings consistent with Parkinson’s disease, the clinical findings do not show that the disease has yet manifested in terms of functional limitations.” ... Given Dr. Chandrasekhar’s opinion regarding plaintiff’s limitations, as well as the medical evidence in the record suggesting that plaintiff’s Parkinson’s disease did not require stricter limitations, there is substantial evidence in the record which supports the ALJ’s determination that the plaintiff's Parkinson’s disease was not a severe impairment. ... For the reasons above, the ALJ’s findings regarding Plaintiff's impairments at step two are supported by substantial evidence and remand is therefore not required on this ground.

Section 416.920(a)(4)(ii) requires assessing the medical severity of impairments at step two, and an impairment is not severe unless it significantly limits basic work abilities.

Anderson v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2019-09-20(a)(4)(ii)

At step two of the sequential disability evaluation process, the “medical severity” of a claimant’s impairments is considered. 20 C.F.R. 404.1520(a)(4)(ii), § 416.920(a)(4)(ii). An impairment is not considered to be “severe” if it does not “significantly limit” a claimant's mental or physical abilities to do basic work activities.

At step two, the regulation requires evaluating whether the claimant has a severe impairment or combination of impairments, and the court held that the ALJ had to at least address the claimant’s somatic and personality-disorder diagnoses in that step-two analysis.

Patricio v. Social Security · filed 2019-09-25(a)(4)(ii)

At Step Two, the claimant bears the burden of showing that he has a medically severe impairment or combination of impairments. See 20 C.F.R. § 416.920(a)(4)(ii), (c). “An impairment is not severe if it is merely ‘a slight abnormality (or combination of slight abnormalities) that has no more than a minimal effect on the ability to do basic work activities.’” Webb v. Barnhart, 433 F.3d 683, 686 (9th Cir. 2005) (quoting S.S.R. No. 96–3(p) (1996)). ... Having established that the rejection of Dr. Franklin’s opinion was not supported by substantial evidence, the court also finds that the ALJ erred in not at least addressing Plaintiff’s somatic and personality disorders diagnoses at Step Two. This error at Step Two, much like the ALJ’s Chavez determination, affects the entirety of the sequential determination.

At step two, an impairment is severe only if it has more than a minimal effect on the claimant’s ability to perform basic work activities; severity is assessed using medical evidence, without considering age, education, or work experience.

Vang v. Saul · filed 2019-09-26(c)

At step two, the claimant must show he has an impairment that significantly limits his ability to work in most jobs. ... “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.” ... That is, the impairment must have “more than a minimal effect on the claimant’s ability to work.” ... Rather, “medical evidence alone is evaluated in order to assess the effects of the impairment(s) on ability to do basic work activities.”