20 C.F.R. § 416.920

Section 416.920(e) requires the Commissioner to assess residual functional capacity before deciding whether a claimant can perform past relevant work; that assessment considers all impairments, including non-severe ones.

(SS) Gegan v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2023-05-08(e)

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

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

(SS) Perez v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2023-06-15(e)

Before making the step four determination, the ALJ first must determine the claimant’s RFC. 20 C.F.R. § 416.920(e); Nowden v. Berryhill, No. EDCV 17-00584-JEM, 2018 WL 1155971, at *2 (C.D. Cal. Mar. 2, 2018).

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

Miner v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2023-07-11(e)

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

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

(SS) Sepulveda v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2023-07-21(e)

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

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

(SS) Scott v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2023-08-17(e)

Before making the step four determination, the ALJ first must determine the claimant’s RFC. 20 C.F.R. § 416.920(e); Nowden v. Berryhill, No. EDCV 17-00584-JEM, 2018 WL 1155971, at *2 (C.D. Cal. Mar. 2, 2018).

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

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

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

Before proceeding to step four, the ALJ must determine the claimant’s residual functional capacity and consider all impairments, including nonsevere impairments and their total limiting effects.

(SS) Dean v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2024-02-28(e)

Before making the step four determination, the ALJ first must determine the claimant’s RFC. 20 C.F.R. § 416.920(e); Nowden v. Berryhill, No. EDCV 17-00584-JEM, 2018 WL 1155971, at *2 (C.D. Cal. Mar. 2, 2018). The RFC is “the most [one] can still do despite [her] limitations” and represents an assessment “based on all the relevant evidence.” 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1545(a)(1); 416.945(a)(1). The RFC must consider all of the claimant’s impairments, including those that are not severe. 20 C.F.R. §§ 416.920(e); 416.945(a)(2); Social Security Ruling (“SSR”) 96-8p, available at 1996 WL 374184 (Jul. 2, 1996). The RFC is “based on all the relevant evidence in [the] case record.” 20 C.F.R. § 416.945(a)(1). “The ALJ must consider a claimant’s physical and mental abilities, § 416.920(b) and (c), as well as the total limiting effects caused by medically determinable impairments and the claimant’s subjective experiences of pain, § 416.920(e).” Garrison, 759 F.3d at 1011.

Before evaluating a claimant’s ability to perform past relevant work at step four, the ALJ must first determine the claimant’s residual functional capacity.

(SS) Gill v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2024-03-18(e)

Before making the step four determination, the ALJ first must determine the claimant’s RFC. 20 C.F.R. § 416.920(e); Nowden v. Berryhill, No. EDCV 17-00584-JEM, 2018 WL 1155971, at *2 (C.D. Cal. Mar. 2, 2018).

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

(SS) Martinez v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2024-05-30(e)

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

Section 416.920(a) uses the residual functional capacity in the sequential evaluation to determine at step four whether a claimant can perform past relevant work and at step five whether the claimant can adjust to other work existing in significant numbers in the national economy.

Davis v. Commissioner Social Security Administration · filed 2024-07-11(a)

The RFC is used at step four of the sequential analysis to determine if a claimant is able to perform past relevant work, and at step five to determine if a claimant can adjust to other work that exists in significant numbers in the national economy. 20 C.F.R. § 416.920(a).

Section 416.920(e) requires the ALJ to determine the claimant’s residual functional capacity before proceeding with the step-four and step-five determinations.

Harasch v. O'Malley · filed 2025-04-25(e)

Before making the step four and five determinations, the ALJ first must determine the claimant’s RFC. 20 C.F.R. § 416.920(e). The RFC is “the most [one] can still do despite [his or her] limitations” and represents an assessment “based on all the relevant evidence.” 20 C.F.R. § 416.945(a)(1). An RFC determination is a legal decision that is expressly reserved for the Commissioner. “[I]t is the responsibility of the ALJ, not the claimant’s physician, to determine residual functional capacity.” Vertigan v. Halter, 260 F.3d 1044, 1049 (9th Cir. 2001).

The regulation requires the ALJ to assess a claimant’s residual functional capacity before proceeding to step four of the disability evaluation.

Risch v. Commisioner of the U.S. Social Security Administration · filed 2025-05-14(a)(4)(iv)

Before moving on to step four, the ALJ must make an RFC finding. See 20 C.F.R. § 416.920(a)(4)(iv).

Section 416.920(a)(4)(iv) requires the ALJ to determine the claimant’s residual functional capacity before proceeding to step four of the disability analysis.

Morris · filed 2025-12-19(a)(4)(iv)

Prior to Step Four of the sequential analysis in a disability determination, the ALJ is required to determine a claimant's RFC. See 20 C.F.R. § 416.920(a)(4)(iv).

At step four, an ALJ must determine a claimant’s residual functional capacity by considering all relevant medical and other evidence.

Akins · filed 2026-01-07(e)

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

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

Hammer · filed 2026-01-22(e)

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

At step four, the administrative law judge must identify the applicant’s residual functional capacity and consider whether the applicant can perform past relevant work.

Robbins v. Comm'r of Soc. Sec. · filed 2024-10-29(a)(4)(iv)

At step four, the administrative law judge must identify the “residual functional capacity” of applicants and consider how this capacity affects their ability to work at prior employment. 20 C.F.R. § 416.920(a)(4)(iv).

Section 416.920(d) provides that a claimant whose impairment meets a listed impairment is automatically found disabled.

MacNeil v. Astrue · filed 2012-08-08(d)

A finding that a claimant suffers from a listed impairment is critical because it results in an automatic finding of disability. See 20 C.F.R. § 416.920(d).

Section 416.920(d) provides that a claimant who meets or equals a listed impairment is considered disabled regardless of age, education, or work experience.

McGee v. Berryhill · filed 2018-12-18(d)

Having found Plaintiff meets the criteria for disability under § 12.04, the court's inquiry ceases, 20 C.F.R. § 416.920(d) (claimant who meets or equals a listed impairment is considered disabled regardless of age, education, and work experience), and the matter is therefore REMANDED for calculation of benefits).

Section 416.920(d) requires a finding of disability at step three, without considering age, education, or work experience, when a claimant's impairment meets or equals a listed impairment.

Salahuddin v. Berryhill · filed 2020-07-10(d)

The Act lists particular impairments, “any of which is sufficient, at step three to create an irrebuttable presumption of disability.” ... “The regulations also provide for a finding of such a disability per se if an individual has an impairment that is ‘equal to’ a listed impairment.” ... see also 20 C.F.R. § 416.920(d). Accordingly, “[a] claimant is automatically entitled to benefits if his or her impairment(s) meets the criteria set forth in Appendix 1 to Subpart P of Part 404. 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520(d) . . . .”

Section 416.920(c) requires consideration of whether a claimant has a severe impairment or combination of impairments, including the severity of impairments in combination.

Malone v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2012-11-29(c)

Malone also argues that the ALJ failed to consider the severity of his impairments in combination, as prescribed by 20 C.F.R. § 416.920(c). However, the ALJ specifically recognized his responsibility to determine whether Malone had a severe impairment or combination of impairments, and whether Malone had an impairment or combination of impairments that were equivalent to an impairment that is listed in Appendix 1. Malone’s argument is also unpersuasive because the ALJ considered all of the symptoms that were consistent with the medical evidence in determining his residual functional capacity.

Section 416.920(c) requires a medically determinable impairment to significantly limit a claimant’s ability to perform basic work activities for at least 12 consecutive months to qualify as severe at step two.

Cheetham v. Colvin · filed 2014-03-24(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 step two analysis is a screening device designed to dispose of de minimis complaints. Smolen v. Chater, 80 F.3d 1273, 1290 (9th Cir.1996). ... Ultimately, Plaintiff does not point to evidence of sustained work-related limitations arising from any these impairments. In other words, Plaintiff does not cite any medical evidence suggesting that her periodic symptoms of diverticulitis, diarrhea, or ovarian cysts caused more than a minimal limitation in her ability to perform basic work-related activities prior to the date last insured.

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; the severity inquiry is a de minimis screening step, and one severe impairment is enough to proceed beyond step two.

Clark v. Commissioner of the Social Security Administration · filed 2023-10-31(c)

A severe impairment is defined by the regulations as “any impairment or combination of impairments which significantly limits your physical or mental ability to do basic work activities.” 20 C.F.R. § 416.920(c). Plaintiff bears the burden of demonstrating that she has a severe impairment. See Bowen v. Yuckert, 482 U.S. 137, 146 n.5 (1987). However, “‘[a]n impairment can be considered as ‘not severe’ only if it is a slight abnormality which has such a 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.’ ” Evans v. Heckler, 734 F.2d 1012, 1014 (4th Cir.1984) (quoting Brady v. Heckler, 724 F.2d 914, 920 (11th Cir.1984)). The severe impairment inquiry “is a de minimis screening device to dispose of groundless claims.” McCrea v. Comm’r, 370 F.3d 357, 360 (3rd Cir. 2004) (citation omitted). A finding of a single severe impairment at step two of the sequential evaluation is enough to ensure that the factfinder will progress to step three. See Carpenter v. Astrue, 537 F.3d 1264, 1266 (10th Cir.2008) (“[A]ny error here became harmless when the ALJ reached the proper conclusion that [claimant] could not be denied benefits conclusively at step two and proceeded to the next step of the evaluation sequence.”).

Section 416.920(c) advances a claim past step two when an impairment significantly limits the claimant’s ability to do basic work activities.

Killian v. O'Malley · filed 2024-11-25(c)

If the claimant suffers from “any impairment or combination of impairments which significantly limits [his or her] physical or mental ability to do basic work activities,” the analysis proceeds to step three. 20 C.F.R. § 416.920(c).

Section 416.920(a)(4)(v) provides that a claimant who can adjust to other work is not disabled under the sequential evaluation process.

Larry v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2013-02-07(a)(4)(v)

A person who does not have a severe impairment, or who can make an adjustment to other work, is not disabled. 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520(a)(4)(v), (c), (g)(1); 20 C.F.R. § 416.920(a)(4)(v), (c), (g)(1). ... In sum, substantial evidence supports the conclusion that Mr. Larry had no severe impairments and thus was ineligible for disability insurance benefits and supplemental security income.

At step five, after assessing residual functional capacity, the regulation requires determining whether the claimant can adjust to other work existing in significant numbers in the national economy.

Jacobs v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2013-06-06(a)(4)(v)

At the fifth step of the sequential evaluation, and after assessing the claimant’s RFC, the ALJ must determine whether a significant number of jobs exist in the national economy that the claimant can perform. Winschel, 631 F.3d at 1180; 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520(a)(4)(v); 20 C.F.R. § 416.920(a)(4)(v). A claimant who can adjust to other work is not disabled. 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520(a)(4)(v), (g)(1); 20 C.F.R. § 416.920(a)(4)(v), (g)(1). ... The ALJ’s hypothetical questions to the vocational expert fully accounted for Jacobs’s moderate difficulties in maintaining his concentration, persistence, or pace by limiting him to one to three step non-complex tasks, consistent with the RFC assessment.

At the listings step, an ALJ must find a claimant disabled if the claimant meets a listed impairment, but need not discuss every listing unless the record raises a substantial question that the claimant could qualify as disabled under it.

Sheeks v. Commissioner of Social Security Administration · filed 2013-11-20(a)(4)(iii)

This appeal concerns (for the most part) the ALJ’s consideration of the disability listings, which follow this sequence. The ALJ asks whether the claimant automatically falls outside the disabled category due to current substantial gainful employment or a lack of a qualifying severe impairment. 20 C.F.R. § 416.920(a)(4)(i)-(ii). If not, the ALJ flips the inquiry and asks whether the claimant satisfies a listed disability. Id. § 416.920(a)(4)(iii). ... The relevant regulations require the ALJ to find a claimant disabled if he meets a listing. Yet they do not require the ALJ to address every listing—and with ample reason. ... In the normal course, as a result, the ALJ need not discuss listings that the applicant clearly does not meet, especially when the claimant does not raise the listing before the ALJ. If, however, the record “raise[s] a substantial question as to whether [the claimant] could qualify as disabled” under a listing, the ALJ should discuss that listing.

Section 416.920(a)(3) requires the ALJ to consider and weigh all relevant evidence in the claimant's case record.

McKinley v. SSA · filed 2014-02-26(a)(3)

An ALJ must consider and weigh all relevant evidence. See Alcantara v. Astrue, 2007 WL 4328148, at *2 (1st Cir. Dec. 12, 2007) (citing 20 C.F.R. §§ 416.920(a) (3), 416.920(a) & (c)).

Section 416.920 requires an ALJ to consider all relevant medical evidence submitted by a claimant, but does not require the ALJ to discuss every piece of evidence.

Ashcraft v. Commissioner Of Social Security Administration · filed 2017-10-02

As correctly stated by the magistrate judge, an ALJ is required to consider all of the relevant medical evidence submitted by a claimant. 20 C.F.R. § 416.920. However, an ALJ is “not obligated to comment on every piece of evidence presented.”

Section 416.920 requires an ALJ to consider all relevant medical evidence submitted by the claimant, although the ALJ need not comment on every piece of evidence.

Greathouse v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2017-10-10

As correctly stated by the magistrate judge, an ALJ is required to consider all of the relevant medical evidence submitted by a claimant. 20 C.F.R. § 416.920. However, an ALJ is “not obligated to comment on every piece of evidence presented.”

Section 416.920 requires the ALJ to consider all record evidence when making the disability determination, but it does not require the ALJ to have the entire record at the preceding hearing.

Reeves v. Social Security Commissioner · filed 2019-11-19

While the regulations governing the issuance of the ALJ’s decision require that he consider all of the record evidence in making that determination, those regulations are silent on the issue of whether the ALJ must have the record at the hearing that precedes that determination. See 20 C.F.R. § 416.920.

Section 416.920 requires an ALJ to consider all relevant medical evidence submitted by the claimant, although the ALJ need not comment on every piece of evidence.

Staudenmaier v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2021-01-22

An ALJ is required to consider all of the relevant medical evidence submitted by a claimant. 20 C.F.R. § 416.920. However, an ALJ is “not obligated to comment on every piece of evidence presented.”

Section 416.920(a)(3) requires an ALJ to consider all relevant evidence when evaluating a disability claim.

Hogan v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2022-12-20(a)(3)

To be sure, an ALJ must consider all relevant record evidence. 20 C.F.R. § 416.920(a)(3). However, the regulations do not require an exhaustive discussion of the evidence when evaluating the consistency and supportability of an opinion. See 20 C.F.R. § 416.920c(b)(2). “[T]here is no rigid requirement that the ALJ specifically refer to every piece of evidence in his decision, so long as the ALJ's decision . . . is not a broad rejection which is not enough to enable [the Court] to conclude that [the ALJ] considered [the claimant’s] medical condition as a whole.” Dyer, 395 F.3d at 1211. The ALJ’s decision here meets these standards.

At the RFC stage, the ALJ must consider all relevant medical and other evidence in the case record.

Munguia v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2025-05-29(e)

Particularly when determining a claimant’s RFC, the ALJ must consider “all the relevant medical and other evidence in [the] case record.” 20 C.F.R. § 416.920(e).

Section 416.920(c) is part of the adult-claim sequential-evaluation rules that govern age-18 redeterminations, including evaluation of whether the claimant has a severe impairment.

Faint v. Colvin · filed 2014-06-18(c)

The rules used for these “age-18 redeterminations” are those applicable to adult claimants who file new applications for benefits, that is, the rules set out in 20 C.F.R. § 416.920(c)-(g). See 20 C.F.R. § 416.987(b).

Section 416.920 requires the ALJ to determine disability through a five-step sequential process, addressing substantial gainful activity, severe impairment, the Listings, past relevant work, and other work in light of the claimant’s residual functional capacity, age, education, and experience.

Philippone v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2020-05-08(b), (c), (d), (e), (f), (g)

To determine if a claimant has sustained a disability within the meaning of the Act, the ALJ follows a five-step process: 1) The ALJ first determines whether the claimant is engaged in SGA. See C.F.R. §§ 416.920(b), 416.972. If so, the claimant is not disabled. See 20 C.F.R. § 416.920(b). 2) If the claimant is not engaged in SGA, the ALJ determines if the claimant has a severe impairment or combination of impairments. See 20 C.F.R. § 416.920(c). If not, the claimant is not disabled. See id. 3) If the claimant has a severe impairment, the ALJ determines if the impairment meets or equals an impairment found in the appendix to the regulations (the “Listings”). If so, the claimant is disabled. See 20 C.F.R. § 416.920(d). 4) If the impairment does not meet the requirements of the Listings, the ALJ determines if the claimant can do her past relevant work. See 20 C.F.R. § 416.920(e), (f). If so, the claimant is not disabled. See 20 C.F.R. § 416.920(f). 5) If the claimant cannot perform her past relevant work, the ALJ determines if she can perform other work, in light of her RFC, age, education, and experience. See 20 C.F.R. § 416.920(f), (g). If so, then she is not disabled. See 20 C.F.R. § 416.920(g). A claimant is only entitled to receive benefits if she cannot perform any alternative gainful activity. See id.

Section 416.920 requires disability claims to be evaluated through a five-step sequence covering substantial gainful activity, severe impairments, listed impairments, past relevant work, and other work.

Nicholson v. Colvin · filed 2015-05-05(b), (c), (d), and (e)

The Commissioner has established a five-step sequential process for determining whether a person is disabled. Bowen v. Yuckert, 482 U.S. 137, 140, 107 S.Ct. 2287, 96 L.Ed.2d 119 (1987); 20 C.F.R. § 416.920. First, the Commissioner determines whether a plaintiff is engaged in “substantial gainful activity.” Yuckert, 482 U.S. at 140, 107 S.Ct. 2287; 20 C.F.R. § 416.920(b). If so, the plaintiff is not disabled.

Section 416.920(a) requires the Commissioner to evaluate disability claims through a five-step sequence: work activity, severe impairment, listed impairment, past work, and other national-economy work.

Shipman v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2017-09-25(a)

In ’ evaluating whether a claimant is disabled, the Com* missioner is to consider, in sequence, whether the claimant; 1) worked during the alleged period of disability; 2) has a severe impairment; 3) has an impairment that meets or equals the requirements of an impairment listed in the regulations; 4) can return to past relevant work; and 5) if not, whether he or she can perform other work - in the national economy.

Section 416.920 requires an ALJ evaluating SSI disability eligibility to use a five-step sequential evaluation process.

Baillargeon v. Nancy A. Berryhill, Acting Commissioner, Social Security Administration · filed 2018-01-15

To decide whether a claimant is disabled for the purpose of determining eligibility for either DIB or SSI, an ALJ is required to employ a five-step sequential evaluation process. See 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1520 (DIB) & 416.920 (SSI).

Section 416.920 requires a five-step sequential analysis of disability claims, with the determination ending at the first applicable step.

Black v. Social Security Administration · filed 2019-01-07(a), (a)(4)

The Commissioner must follow a five-step sequential analysis to determine whether the claimant is disabled and thus whether the application for Social Security benefits should be granted. 20 C.F.R. § 416.920(a). The determination may be concluded at any step of the analysis. 20 C.F.R. § 416.920(a)(4). First, if the claimant is engaged in substantial gainful work activity, the application is denied. Id. § 416.920(a)(4)(i). Second, if the claimant does not have, or has not had, within the relevant time period, a severe medically determinable impairment or combination of impairments, the application is denied. Id. at § 416.920(a)(4)(ii). Third, if the impairment meets the conditions of one of the listed impairments in the Social Security regulations, the application is granted. Id. at § 416.920(a)(4)(iii). Fourth, where the impairment does not meet the conditions of one of the listed impairments, the Commissioner determines the claimant’s RFC. Id. at § 416.920(a)(4)(iv). If the claimant’s RFC is such that she can still perform her past relevant work, the application is denied. Id. Fifth, if the claimant, given her RFC, education, work experience and age, is unable to do any other work within the national economy, she is disabled and the application is granted. Id. at § 416.920(a)(4)(v).

Section 416.920(a)(4) requires an ALJ to evaluate an SSI disability claim through a five-step sequence: substantial gainful activity, severe impairment, listed impairment, residual functional capacity and past work, and adjustment to other work.

Burrage v. Social Security Administration · filed 2019-08-12(a)(4)

ALJs use a five-step analysis to resolve the question of disability: At step one, the ALJ must determine whether the claimant is engaging in substantial gainful activity; if the claimant is performing substantial gainful activity, then the claimant is not disabled. At step two, the ALJ must determine whether the claimant has a medically determinable impairment or combination of impairments that is “severe.” If the claimant does not have a severe impairment or combination of impairments, then the claimant is not disabled. At step three, the ALJ must determine whether the claimant’s impairment meets an impairment listed in 20 C.F.R. Part 404, Subpart P, Appendix 1. If the claimant’s impairment meets or equals one of the listings, then the ALJ will find the claimant disabled. Otherwise, the ALJ will proceed to the fourth step, where the ALJ must assess the claimant’s residual functional capacity and past work. If the claimant can still perform his or her past relevant work, the claimant is not disabled. If the claimant cannot perform past relevant work, the ALJ must determine whether the claimant can make an adjustment to other work at step five. If the claimant cannot make the adjustment, the ALJ will find the claimant disabled.

Section 416.920 requires disability claims to be evaluated through a five-step sequence; at step two, an impairment is severe only if it significantly limits basic work activities, and at the final step, a claimant who cannot perform other work considering the claimant’s RFC and vocational factors is disabled.

Mojica v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2019-09-11(c), (g)

Regulations issued pursuant to the Act set forth a five-step process that the Commissioner must use in evaluating a disability claim. ... Second, if the claimant is not engaged in substantial gainful activity, the Commissioner must decide if the claimant has a “severe medically determinable physical or mental impairment,” 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1520(a)(4)(ii), 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,” 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1520(c), 416.920(c). ... If the claimant cannot perform other work, he or she will be deemed disabled. 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1520(a)(4)(v), 416.920(a)(4)(v).

Section 416.920(a)(4) establishes the five-step sequential process used to determine whether a claimant is disabled.

Shahin v. Social Security · filed 2020-01-03(a)(4)

SSA regulations establish a “five-step sequential evaluation process” for making a disability determination. 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1520(a)(4), 416.920(a)(4).

Section 416.920 requires disability claims to be evaluated through a five-step sequential process, ending with whether the claimant can perform other work based on residual functional capacity, age, education, and work experience.

Byrd v. Berryhill · filed 2020-01-31

Regulations set forth by the Commissioner prescribe that disability claims are to be evaluated according to a five-step process. 20 C.F.R. ' 404.1520, 20 C.F.R. § 416.920. A finding that a claimant is disabled or not disabled at any point in the process is conclusive and terminates the Commissioner’s analysis. The first step involves determining whether the claimant is currently engaged in substantial gainful activity. If so, the claimant will be found not disabled regardless of his medical condition or his age, education, or work experience. The second step involves determining whether the claimant’s impairment is severe. If it is not severe, the claimant is deemed not disabled. In the third step, the Commissioner compares the severe impairment(s) with those on a list of specific impairments. If it meets or equals a listed impairment, the claimant is deemed disabled without considering his age, education, or work experience. If the impairment is not on the list, the Commissioner, in the fourth step, reviews the claimant’s residual functional capacity (“RFC”) and the demands of his past work. If the claimant is still able to do his past work, the claimant is not disabled. If the claimant cannot perform his past work, the Commissioner moves to the fifth and final step of evaluating the claimant’s ability, given his residual capacities, age, education, and work experience, to do other work. If the claimant cannot do other work, he will be found disabled.

Section 416.920 requires disability claims to be evaluated through a five-step sequential process, including determining the claimant's ability to perform past relevant work and other work in the national economy.

WOY v. SOCIAL SECURITY COMMISSIONER · filed 2020-03-09

The Commissioner has provided the ALJ with a five-step sequential analysis to use when evaluating the disabled status of each claimant. 20 C.F.R. § 416.920. The ALJ must determine: (1) whether the claimant is currently engaged in substantial gainful activity; (2) if not, whether the claimant has a severe impairment; (3) if the claimant has a severe impairment, whether it meets or equals the criteria listed in 20 C.F.R. pt. 404, subpt. P, app. 1; (4) if the impairment does not satisfy one of the impairment listings, whether the claimant’s impairments prevent him from performing his past relevant work; and (5) if the claimant is incapable of performing his past relevant work, whether he can perform any other work which exists in the national economy, in light of his age, education, work experience and residual functional capacity. 20 C.F.R. § 416.920.

Section 416.920 requires the Commissioner to determine disability through a five-step sequential evaluation process, with the determination permitted to end at any step.

Rashid v. Berryhill · filed 2020-03-17

The Commissioner must follow a five-step sequential evaluation process to determine whether an individual has a disability for Social Security purposes and, thus, whether that individual’s application for benefits should be granted. 20 C.F.R. § 416.920. The determination may be concluded at any step along the process. Id.

Section 416.920(a)(4) requires disability claims to be evaluated through specified steps in sequence, stopping when the claimant is conclusively found disabled or not disabled.

Covey v. Berryhill · filed 2020-03-19(a)(4)

The Commissioner uses a five-step process in evaluating SSI claims. See 20 C.F.R. § 416.920 (2019). See also Heckler v. Campbell, 461 U.S. 458, 460-62 (1983); Hall v. Harris, 658 F. 2d 260, 264-65 (4th Cir. 1981). 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 her past relevant work; and 5) if not, whether she 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) (2019).

Section 416.920 requires the Commissioner to evaluate SSI claims through five ordered steps and stop when a claimant is conclusively found disabled or not disabled.

Widener v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2020-03-23(a)(4)

The Commissioner uses a five-step process in evaluating SSI claims. See 20 C.F.R. § 416.920 (2019). See also Heckler v. Campbell, 461 U.S. 458, 460-62 (1983); Hall v. Harris, 658 F. 2d 260, 264-65 (4th Cir. 1981). 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 her past relevant work; and 5) if not, whether she 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) (2019).

Section 416.920 requires disability claims to be evaluated through a five-step sequence addressing work activity, impairment severity, listed impairments, past relevant work, and adjustment to other work.

WASHINGTON v. COMMISSIONER OF SOCIAL SECURITY · filed 2020-12-18

As explained in the applicable agency regulation, each case is evaluated by the Commissioner according to a five-step sequential analysis: ... (v) At the fifth and last step, we consider our assessment of your residual functional capacity and your age, education and work experience to see if you can make an adjustment to other work. If you can make an adjustment to other work, we will find that you are not disabled. If you cannot make an adjustment to other work, we will find that you are disabled. ... Accordingly, the ALJ evaluated Washington’s disability claim under the correct legal standards set forth in the applicable regulations.

Section 416.920(a)(4) establishes a five-step process for deciding disability, and the inquiry ends when a step is dispositive.

MORALES v. COMMISSIONER OF SOCIAL SECURITY · filed 2021-02-02(a)(4)

The Secretary of Health and Human Services has established a five-step sequential evaluation process to determine whether a plaintiff is disabled. See 20 C.F.R. § 416.920. If the determination at a particular step is dispositive of whether the plaintiff is or is not disabled, the inquiry ends. 20 C.F.R. § 416.920(a)(4).

Section 416.920(a) applies the same five-step disability-evaluation framework to supplemental security income claims as applies to disability insurance claims.

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). Smith v. Comm’r of Soc. Sec., 486 F. App’x 874, 875 n.* (11th Cir. 2012) (per curiam) (“The definition of disability and the test used to determine whether a person has a disability is the same for claims seeking disability insurance benefits or supplemental security income.”). For the balance of this Opinion, all references to 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520 also refer to 20 C.F.R. § 416.920.

Section 416.920(a)(4) requires disability claims to be evaluated through a five-step sequential process, including a Step Two determination of whether the claimant has a severe medically determinable impairment.

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).

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

Battle 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 establishes a five-step process for evaluating disability claims and requires the residual functional capacity assessment to consider all of the claimant’s impairments, including non-severe impairments.

(SS) Vang v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2021-06-04(a), (e)

To achieve uniformity in the decision-making process, the Commissioner has established a sequential five-step process for evaluating a claimant’s alleged disability. 20 C.F.R. §§ 416.920(a)-(f). ... The RFC must consider all of the claimant’s impairments, including those that are not severe. 20 C.F.R. §§ 416.920(e), 416.945(a)(2); Social Security Ruling (“SSR”) 96–8p.

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

Sneed, Jr. v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2021-07-13(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 requires disability claims to be evaluated through a five-step sequential process, including determining whether the claimant has a severe impairment and whether the impairments meet or equal a listed impairment.

Randy M. v. Kijakazi · filed 2021-10-05(b), (c), (d), (e)-(f), (g)

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).

Section 416.920 requires disability claims to be evaluated through a five-step sequence, including severity at step two, the Listings at step three, and work ability at later steps.

Lilibeth G. v. Kijakazi · filed 2021-11-01(c), (d), (e)

The ALJ must follow five steps in evaluating a claim of disability. See 20 C.F.R. § 416.920. The first step, which requires examination whether the claimant is working at a substantial gainful activity, is not used for an Age-18-Redetermination. 20 C.F.R. § 416.987(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.

At Step Five of the disability evaluation, if the claimant cannot return to past relevant work, the Commissioner must show that the claimant retains the residual functional capacity to perform other work existing in significant numbers in the national economy.

Merrill v. Saul · filed 2022-01-11(a)(4)(v)

If the Commissioner determines the claimant cannot return to PRW, the burden shifts to the Commissioner at Step Five to show the claimant retains the RFC to perform other work that exists in significant numbers in the national economy. Id.; 20 C.F.R. § 416.920(a)(4)(v).

Section 416.920 requires disability claims to be evaluated in five sequential steps, including a final step asking whether the claimant can perform work existing in significant numbers in the national economy.

White v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2022-03-09

The Commissioner evaluates disability claims pursuant to a five-step evaluation process, requiring consideration of the following issues, in sequence: (1) whether the claimant is currently unemployed in substantial gainful activity; (2) whether the claimant has a severe impairment; (3) whether her impairment is one that the Commissioner considers conclusively disabling; (4) whether the claimant is incapable of performing her past relevant work; and (5) whether the claimant is incapable of performing any work in the national economy.3 See Dixon v. Massanari, 270 F.3d 1171, 1176 (7th Cir. 2001) (citations omitted); 20 C.F.R. § 416.920. ... Given the foregoing persuasive authority, and the lack of definitive guidance in this circuit as to what constitutes a significant number of jobs, I conclude that 118,000 jobs in the national economy is a “significant number” of jobs for purposes of the ALJ’s step-five determination in this case.

Section 416.920 requires an ALJ to use a five-step sequential process to evaluate disability and continue beyond Step Two when the evidence does not clearly establish that the claimant's impairments have no more than a minimal effect on basic work activities.

Ellis v. Saul · filed 2022-04-11(a)(4)(i)-(v), (a)(4)

The Court finds that the ALJ erred in the Step Two analysis because the medical evidence did not clearly establish that Plaintiff’s impairment or combination of impairments had only a minimal effect on Plaintiff’s ability to perform basic work activities. ... “If such a finding is not clearly established by medical evidence, however, adjudication must continue through the sequential evaluation process.”

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

White v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2022-05-16(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(a) requires SSI disability claims to be evaluated through a five-step sequence addressing substantial gainful activity, severe impairment, listed impairments, residual functional capacity and past work, and adjustment to other work.

MCCORMACK v. COMMISSIONER OF SOCIAL SECURITY · filed 2022-06-03(a)

To evaluate a claim for SSI benefits, the Social Security Administration follows a five-step sequential evaluation process. Id. § 416.920(a)(1). First, it must be determined whether the claimant is currently doing any substantial gainful activity. Id. § 416.920(a)(4)(i). If he is currently doing any substantial gainful activity, then his claim is denied. Id. Otherwise, the inquiry proceeds to the second step, where the evaluator determines whether the claimant has any severe impairment. Id. § 416.920(a)(4)(ii). If he does not have a severe impairment, then the claim is denied. If the evaluator determines the claimant has a severe impairment, the inquiry proceeds to the third step, where the evaluator determines whether any of the claimant’s impairments is equivalent to one of the listed impairments. Id. § 416.920(a)(4)(iii). If the claimant has any of the listed impairments, he is considered disabled, and the inquiry ceases. Id. Otherwise, the inquiry proceeds to the fourth step, where the evaluator determines the claimant’s residual functional capacity (“RFC”) and whether the claimant can return to his past relevant work. Id. § 416.920(a)(4)(iv). If the claimant can return to work, he is not disabled, and the inquiry ceases. Id. Otherwise, the inquiry proceeds to the fifth and final step, where the evaluator determines whether the claimant can adjust to any other substantial gainful work available in the national economy. Id. § 416.920(a)(4)(v). If the claimant can adjust to other work, then he is not disabled. Id. If he is unable to adjust to other work, he is disabled, and is eligible for benefits. Id.

Section 416.920 requires disability claims to be evaluated through five sequential steps and allows the analysis to stop at step two only when the impairment or combination does not significantly limit basic work activities.

Mitchell v. Kijakazi · filed 2022-06-21(a)(4), (c)

To be severe, the impairment or combination of impairments must “significantly limit [a claimant’s] physical or mental ability to do basic work activities.” ... However, as the Eighth Circuit explained in Hudson v. Bowen, a de minimis standard applies to the step two severity determination. ... The Court finds that Plaintiff has satisfied the de minimis showing at step two that her impairments severely limit her ability to interact with others, and remand is appropriate for the Commissioner to complete the remaining steps in the evaluation.

Section 416.920 establishes a five-step disability evaluation, including a Step Two requirement that an impairment significantly limit a claimant’s physical or mental ability to do basic work activities.

Mueller v. Commissioner of Social Security Administration · filed 2022-07-13(a)(1), (c)

The SSA has created a five-step process for an ALJ to determine whether the claimant is disabled. See 20 C.F.R. § 416.920(a)(1). Each step is potentially dispositive. See id. § 416.920(a)(4). ... At the second step, the ALJ considers the medical severity of the claimant’s impairments. Id. § 416.920(a)(4)(ii). If the claimant does not have “a severe medically determinable physical or mental impairment,” the claimant is not disabled. Id. A “severe impairment” is one which “significantly limits [the claimant’s] physical or mental ability to do basic work activities.” Id. § 416.920(c). Basic work activities are “the abilities and aptitudes necessary to do most jobs.” Id. § 416.922(b). ... Additionally, the burden is on the claimant to submit evidence that his impairments are of a severity that would “significantly limit [his] physical and mental ability to do basic work activities.” 20 C.F.R. § 416.920(c). ... Here, the ALJ reviewed the record evidence, medical opinions, and the lay witness statement before him to determine that Plaintiff had the following severe impairments at Step Two: left leg neuropathy, status post left knee replacement, and ADHD. (Doc. 16-3 at 21). Additionally, the ALJ considered the rest of Plaintiff’s limitations and asserted symptoms and included related additional functional limitations into Plaintiff’s RFC. (Id. at 23–27). The Court does not find that Plaintiff raises any substantiated claim of error at Step Two that warrants reversal.

Section 416.920 requires the Commissioner to use a five-step sequential evaluation to determine whether a claimant is disabled, including considering substantial gainful activity, severe impairments, listed impairments, residual functional capacity and past relevant work.

Graybill v. Kijakazi · filed 2022-09-19

The Commissioner engages in a five-step evaluation process to determine whether a claimant is disabled. See 20 C.F.R. § 416.920; Bowen v. Yuckert, 482 U.S. 137, 140-42 (1987). At Step One, the ALJ determines whether the claimant is currently engaged in substantial gainful activity. At Step Two, the ALJ considers whether the claimant has a “severe” impairment or combination of impairments. At Step Three, the ALJ determines whether the severe impairment(s) meets or medically equals the severity of a listed impairment; if so, the claimant is determined to be disabled, and if not, the ALJ's analysis proceeds to Step Four. At Step Four of the process, the ALJ must assess the claimant's residual functional capacity (RFC) – that is, the most the claimant is able to do despite her physical and mental limitations, Martise v. Astrue, 641 F.3d 909, 923 (8th Cir. 2011) – and determine whether the claimant is able to perform any past relevant work. Goff v. Barnhart, 421 F.3d 785, 790 (8th Cir. 2005) (RFC assessment occurs at the fourth step of process).

Section 416.920 establishes a five-step sequential evaluation for disability claims, placing the burden on the claimant at the first four steps and on the Commissioner at the fifth step to show that the claimant can perform other work existing in significant numbers in the national economy, while the claimant retains the ultimate burden of proving disability.

Haynes v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2022-09-20

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.

Section 416.920(a)(4) requires the Commissioner to use a five-step disability evaluation, including assessing severe impairments at step two and the claimant’s ability to perform past or other work at steps four and five.

Neely v. Saul · filed 2022-10-17(a)(4)(ii), (a)(4)(iv), (a)(4)(v)

In determining whether a person is disabled, the Commissioner is required to perform a five-step sequential analysis. ... If the claimant is not engaged in substantial gainful activity, step two requires the Commissioner to determine whether the claimant is suffering from a severe impairment or a combination of impairments that is severe. ... At step four, the Commissioner determines whether the claimant retains the residual functional capacity (or “RFC”) to perform his or her past relevant work. ... If the claimant is unable to return to his or her past relevant work, step five requires the Commissioner to determine whether the claimant’s impairments preclude him or her from adjusting to any other available work. ... In sum, the ALJ erred in failing to consider at step two whether Neely’s insomnia and anxiety disorder amount to severe impairments. ... The ALJ’s failure to analyze the effects of Neely’s mild mental limitations on his ability to work at steps four and five was particularly important, in view of the ALJ’s conclusion that Neely could perform his past semi-skilled and skilled relevant work. ... Therefore, this case will be remanded for the additional reason that the Commissioner should address—as part of the RFC analysis and in the hypothetical questions posed to the VE—whether Neely’s mild depression related-limitations impact his ability to perform relevant work (and if so, how).

Section 416.920(a)(4) requires the Commissioner to evaluate disability claims through a five-step sequence: work activity, severe impairment, listed impairment, past relevant work, and other work in the national economy.

Faith Dennis v. Kijakazi · filed 2023-04-14(a)(4)

In evaluating whether an individual is disabled, the Commissioner uses a five-step process. See 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1520(a)(4), 416.920(a)(4). 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 establishes a five-step process for deciding 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.

Knoop v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2023-06-26

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 a five-step sequential evaluation of disability claims, moving from substantial gainful activity and severity through listed impairments and residual functional capacity to other work in the national economy.

Medeiros v. Kijakazi · filed 2023-08-31(a)(4)

The Commissioner uses a sequential five-step process to evaluate whether a claimant is disabled. See Mills v. Apfel, 244 F.3d 1, 2 (1st Cir. 2001); 20 C.F.R. § 416.920. Those steps are: 1) if the applicant is engaged in substantial gainful work activity, the application is denied; 2) if the applicant does not have, or has not had . . . a severe impairment or combination of impairments, the application is denied; 3) if the impairment meets the conditions for one of the ‘listed’ impairments in the Social Security regulations, then the application is granted; 4) if the applicant’s ‘residual functional capacity’ is such that he or she can still perform past relevant work, then the application is denied; 5) if the applicant, given his or her residual functional capacity, education, work experience, and age, is unable to do any other work, the application is granted.

Section 416.920 requires an ALJ to evaluate disability claims through a five-step sequence: substantial gainful activity, severe impairment, listed impairment, residual functional capacity and past relevant work, and ability to perform other work.

Hay v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2023-12-17(b)-(g)

To arrive at a determination as to disability, the ALJ must undertake the sequential evaluation embodied in 20 C.F.R. § 416.920. This process requires that the ALJ first determine whether the claimant is presently engaged in substantial gainful activity. 20 C.F.R. § 416.920(b). If so, a finding of “no disability” is made. ... If the claimant is not engaged in such work, then the ALJ must proceed to the second step and determine whether the claimant suffers from a “severe impairment.” ... The third step requires the ALJ to determine whether the claimant’s impairment meets or equals those listed in Appendix 1 of the Regulations. ... Step four requires the ALJ to determine whether the claimant has the residual functional capacity (“RFC”) to perform past relevant work. ... If the claimant establishes an inability to return to past relevant work, the inquiry turns to step five. ... At this fifth and final step, the ALJ must resolve whether the claimant is actually capable of performing other work. See 20 C.F.R. §§ 416.920(g), 416.960(c).

Section 416.920 requires disability to be evaluated through a five-step process, including a step-three determination of whether the claimant's impairments meet a Listing; the ALJ must adequately support that determination with specific evidence.

Uht v. Kijakazi, Acting Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2024-03-22

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. ... At step three of the five-step evaluation process under 20 C.F.R. § 416.920, the ALJ determines whether the plaintiff’s impairments meet one of the Listings in Appendix 1 of Subpart P. Paragraph B of the Listings requires the Plaintiff have either an extreme limitation in one or a marked limitation in two of the broad areas of functioning: (1) understand, remember, or apply information; (2) interact with others; (3) concentrate, persist, or maintain pace; or (4) adapt or manage oneself.

Section 416.920 requires a five-step disability evaluation for an adult claimant and places the step-five burden on the Commissioner to show that the claimant can perform other work based on her residual functional capacity, age, education, and past work experience.

Baker v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2024-04-15

An ALJ applies a five-step disability evaluation for the period after a claimant reaches age 18. 20 C.F.R. § 416.920. At step five, the burden shifts to the Commissioner to prove that, based on the plaintiff’s residual functional capacity, age, education, and past work experience, she can do other work. Bowen v. Yuckert, 482 U.S. 137, 142 (1987). If she can, she is not disabled; if she cannot, she is disabled. Id.

Section 416.920(a)(4) requires the ALJ to evaluate disability through a five-step sequence addressing work activity, severe impairment, listed impairments, past relevant work, and other work.

Fritz v. Kijakazi · filed 2024-05-07(a)(4)

To determine whether a claimant is disabled, an ALJ follows the five-step analysis set forth in 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520(a)(4) and 20 C.F.R. § 416.920(a)(4). ... During the five-step process, the ALJ considers (1) whether the claimant is gainfully employed, (2) whether the claimant has a severe impairment, (3) whether the impairment meets the criteria of any Social Security Income listings, (4) whether the impairment prevents the claimant from performing past relevant work, and (5) whether the impairment necessarily prevents the claimant from doing any other work.

Section 416.920(a)(4) requires the ALJ to evaluate disability sequentially, including substantial gainful activity at step one, listed impairments at step three, and residual functional capacity and past relevant work at step four.

Shumate v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2024-07-15(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 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 his 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 disability claims to be evaluated through a five-step sequential process, including consideration of substantial gainful activity, severity, listed impairments, residual functional capacity, past work, and other work.

EVERITT v. O'MALLEY · filed 2024-07-23(a)(4)

A five-step sequential analysis is used to evaluate a disability claim: ... 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).

Section 416.920 requires the SSA to evaluate disability claims through five sequential steps: substantial gainful activity, severe impairment, listed impairment, past relevant work based on residual functional capacity, and other work in the national economy.

Valderrama v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2024-08-21(b), (c), (d), (e), and (g)

(1) First, the ALJ must determine whether the claimant is currently engaged in “substantial gainful activity” (“SGA”), which is significant physical or mental activity that is done for pay or profit. 20 C.F.R. §§ 416.920(b), 416.972(a), 416.972(b). If the claimant is not engaged in SGA, the ALJ proceeds to the second step. (2) Second, the ALJ must determine whether the claimant has a medical impairment, or combination of impairments, that is “severe,” which means an impairment that significantly limits his physical or mental ability to work. 20 C.F.R. §§ 416.920(c), 416.922. If the claimant has a severe impairment or combination of impairments, the analysis proceeds to step three. (3) Third, the ALJ must determine whether the claimant’s impairment, or combination of impairments, is listed in 20 C.F.R. 404 Subpart P, Appendix 1, or medically equal to an impairment therein. 20 C.F.R. §§ 416.920(d), 416.926. If the claimant has such an impairment, the ALJ will determine he is per se disabled. Selian v. Astrue, 708 F.3d 409, 418 (2d Cir. 2013). If not, the ALJ’s analysis will proceed to step four. (4) Fourth, the ALJ must determine the claimant’s residual functional capacity (“RFC”), and if he has the RFC to perform the requirements of claimant’s past relevant work. 20 C.F.R. § 416.920(e). An RFC is a claimant’s ability, despite limitations from his impairments, to engage in physical and mental work activities on a sustained basis. 20 C.F.R. § 404.1545(a)(1). If the ALJ determines the claimant is unable to do any of his past relevant work, the analysis proceeds to step five. (5) Fifth, the ALJ must determine whether the claimant is able to do any other work (considering his RFC, age, education, and work experience), that exists in significant numbers in the national economy. 20 C.F.R. § 416.920(g).

Section 416.920 sets out the five-step sequential process the Commissioner uses to evaluate SSI disability claims.

Diaz v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2024-10-09

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.

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

Miller v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2024-12-05(b), (c), (d), (e), and (g)

Consideration of disability claims follows a five-step review process. 20 C.F.R. § 416.920. First, the claimant must demonstrate that she is not currently engaged in “substantial gainful activity” at the time of the disability application. 20 C.F.R. § 416.920(b). Second, the claimant must show that she suffers from a “severe impairment” in order to warrant a finding of disability. 20 C.F.R. § 416.920(c). ... Third, if the claimant is not performing substantial gainful activity, has a severe impairment that is expected to last for at least twelve months, and the impairment, or combination of impairments, meets or medically equals a required listing under 20 CFR Part 404, Subpart P, Appendix 1, the claimant is presumed to be disabled regardless of age, education or work experience. See 20 C.F.R. § 416.920(d). ... Before considering Step Four, the ALJ must determine the claimant’s residual functional capacity, i.e., the claimant’s ability to do physical and mental work activities on a sustained basis despite limitations from her impairments. 20 C.F.R. § 416.920(e). ... At the fourth step, if the claimant’s impairment or combination of impairments does not prevent her from doing her past relevant work, the claimant is not disabled. 20 C.F.R. §§ 416.920(e)–(f). For the fifth and final step, even if the claimant’s impairment does prevent her from doing her past relevant work, the claimant is not disabled if other work exists in the national economy that the claimant can perform. 20 C.F.R. § 416.920(g). See Abbott, 905 F.2d at 923.

Section 416.920(a) requires an ALJ to evaluate an adult disability claim through a five-step sequence, with the claimant bearing the burden through step four and the Commissioner at step five.

Jaymin V. v. King · filed 2025-02-18(a)

For claimants aged eighteen and over, the ALJ must follow five steps in evaluating a claim of disability. See 20 C.F.R. § 416.920(a). First, if a claimant is working at a substantial gainful activity, the claimant is not disabled. Id. § 416.920(a)(4)(i). 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. Id. § 416.920(a)(4)(ii). 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. Id. § 416.920(a)(4)(iii). Fourth, if a claimant’s impairments do not prevent doing past relevant work, the claimant is not disabled. Id. § 416.920(a)(4)(iv). 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. Id. § 416.920(a)(4)(v). Significantly, the claimant bears the burden of proof at Steps One through Four, but the Commissioner bears the burden at Step Five. Sacilowski, 959 F.3d at 434; Wells v. Barnhart, 267 F. Supp. 2d 138, 143-44 (D. Mass. 2003) (five-step process applies to SSI and DIB claims).

Section 416.920 requires the Commissioner to determine disability through a five-step sequential evaluation, including whether the claimant has a severe impairment, meets a listed impairment, can perform past work, or can perform other work in the national economy.

Lansky v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2025-03-25(a)(4)

The Commissioner reaches a determination as to whether a claimant is disabled by way of a five- stage process. 20 C.F.R. § 416.920(a)(4). See also Ealy v. Comm’r of Soc. Sec., 594 F.3d 504, 512 (6th Cir. 2010); Abbott v. Sullivan, 905 F.2d 918, 923 (6th Cir. 1990). First, the claimant must demonstrate that they are not currently engaged in “substantial gainful activity” at the time of the disability application. 20 C.F.R. § 416.920(b). Second, the claimant must show that they suffer from a “severe impairment” in order to warrant a finding of disability. 20 C.F.R. § 416.920(c). A “severe impairment” is one that “significantly limits . . . physical or mental ability to do basic work activities.” Abbot, 905 F.2d at 923. Third, if the claimant is not performing substantial gainful activity, has a severe impairment that is expected to last for at least twelve months, and the impairment, or combination of impairments, meets or medically equals a required listing under 20 CFR Part 404, Subpart P, Appendix 1, the claimant is presumed to be disabled regardless of age, education, or work experience. See 20 C.F.R. § 416.920(d). Fourth, if the claimant’s impairment or combination of impairments does not prevent the claimant from doing their past relevant work, the claimant is not disabled. 20 C.F.R. § 416.920(e)-(f). For the fifth and final step, even if the claimant’s impairment does prevent the claimant from doing their past relevant work, if other work exists in the national economy that the claimant can perform, the claimant is not disabled. 20 C.F.R. § 416.920(g).

Section 416.920 requires a disability claim to be evaluated through a five-step sequential process, including a new application filed after benefits were terminated for a nonmedical reason.

Richardson v. Bisignano · filed 2025-07-01

The disability determination is based on a five-step sequential evaluation process as set forth in 20 C.F.R. § 416.920 under which the ALJ is to evaluate a claim: ... Here, Claimant’s benefits were previously terminated due to his incarceration lasting more than twelve months, so he was not an individual “entitled to disability benefits” at the time the ALJ considered his application, and the CDR framework, along with its medical improvement inquiry, was inapplicable to the newly filed claim. ... Accordingly, AR 00-1(4) does not apply to the instant claim, and the ALJ did not err in applying the five-step sequential evaluation rather than the CDR framework.

Section 416.920 requires a five-step disability evaluation: assess substantial gainful activity, severe impairment, listed impairment, residual functional capacity, and other available work.

Kaufman v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2025-07-11(b), (c), (d), (e), and (g)

Consideration of disability claims follows a five-step review process. 20 C.F.R. § 416.920. First, the claimant must demonstrate that she is not currently engaged in “substantial gainful activity” at the time of the disability application. 20 C.F.R. § 416.920(b). Second, the claimant must show that she suffers from a “severe impairment” in order to warrant a finding of disability. 20 C.F.R. § 416.920(c). A “severe impairment” is one that “significantly limits . . . physical or mental ability to do basic work activities.” Abbott v. Sullivan, 905 F.2d 918, 923 (6th Cir. 1990) (quoting 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1520(c) and 416.920(c)). Third, if the claimant is not performing substantial gainful activity, has a severe impairment that is expected to last for at least twelve months, and the impairment, or combination of impairments, meets or medically equals a required listing under 20 CFR Part 404, Subpart P, Appendix 1, the claimant is presumed to be disabled regardless of age, education or work experience. See 20 C.F.R. § 416.920(d). Before considering Step Four, the ALJ must determine the claimant’s residual functional capacity, i.e., the claimant’s ability to do physical and mental work activities on a sustained basis despite limitations from her impairments. 20 C.F.R. § 416.920(e). ... At the fourth step, if the claimant’s impairment or combination of impairments does not prevent her from doing her past relevant work, the claimant is not disabled. 20 C.F.R. §§ 416.920(e)–(f). For the fifth and final step, even if the claimant’s impairment does prevent her from doing her past relevant work, the claimant is not disabled if other work exists in the national economy that the claimant can perform. 20 C.F.R. § 416.920(g). See Abbott, 905 F.2d at 923.

Section 416.920(a) requires disability claims to be evaluated through a five-step sequence, with the inquiry ending when the claimant is found disabled or not disabled at any step.

Rodrigues v. O'Malley · filed 2025-07-13(a)

The Commissioner must follow a five-step process to determine whether a claimant has a disability for Social Security purposes and, thus, whether to approve the claimant’s application for benefits. 20 C.F.R. § 416.920(a). If at any step in the process the Commissioner finds the claimant to be disabled or not disabled, then the inquiry ends. Id. § 416.920(a)(4).

Section 416.920 requires disability claims to be evaluated through a five-step sequence addressing substantial gainful activity, severe impairment, listed impairments, residual functional capacity and past work, and other available work.

Conrad · filed 2025-11-18(b), (c), (d), (e), (g)

Consideration of disability claims follows a five-step review process. 20 C.F.R. § 416.920. First, the claimant must demonstrate that she is not currently engaged in “substantial gainful activity” at the time of the disability application. 20 C.F.R. § 416.920(b). Second, the claimant must show that she suffers from a “severe impairment” in order to warrant a finding of disability. 20 C.F.R. § 416.920(c). A “severe impairment” is one that “significantly limits . . . physical or mental ability to do basic work activities.” Abbott v. Sullivan, 905 F.2d 918, 923 (6th Cir. 1990) (quoting 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1520(c) and 416.920(c)). ... Third, if the claimant is not performing substantial gainful activity, has a severe impairment that is expected to last for at least twelve months, and the impairment, or combination of impairments, meets or medically equals a required listing under 20 CFR Part 404, Subpart P, Appendix 1, the claimant is presumed to be disabled regardless of age, education or work experience. See 20 C.F.R. § 416.920(d). ... Before considering Step Four, the ALJ must determine the claimant’s residual functional capacity, i.e., the claimant’s ability to do physical and mental work activities on a sustained basis despite limitations from her impairments. 20 C.F.R. § 416.920(e). ... At the fourth step, if the claimant’s impairment or combination of impairments does not prevent her from doing her past relevant work, the claimant is not disabled. 20 C.F.R. §§ 416.920(e)–(f). For the fifth and final step, even if the claimant’s impairment does prevent her from doing her past relevant work, the claimant is not disabled if other work exists in the national economy that the claimant can perform. 20 C.F.R. § 416.920(g). See Abbott, 905 F.2d at 923.

Section 416.920 requires an ALJ to determine disability through a five-step sequential analysis, including assessing residual functional capacity and past relevant work at step four and considering other work in the national economy at step five.

Nicol · filed 2026-02-05

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).

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

Bowen · filed 2026-02-20(b), (c), (d), (e), (g)

“Consideration of disability claims follows a five-step review process. 20 C.F.R. § 416.920. First, the claimant must demonstrate that she is not currently engaged in “substantial gainful activity” at the time of the disability application. 20 C.F.R. § 416.920(b). Second, the claimant must show that she suffers from a “severe impairment” in order to warrant a finding of disability. 20 C.F.R. § 416.920(c). A “severe impairment” is one that “significantly limits . . . physical or mental ability to do basic work activities.” Abbott v. Sullivan, 905 F.2d 918, 923 (6th Cir. 1990) (quoting 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1520(c) and 416.920(c)). Third, if the claimant is not performing substantial gainful activity, has a severe impairment that is expected to last for at least twelve months, and the impairment, or combination of impairments, meets or medically equals a required listing under 20 CFR Part 404, Subpart P, Appendix 1, the claimant is presumed to be disabled regardless of age, education or work experience. See 20 C.F.R. § 416.920(d). Before considering Step Four, the ALJ must determine the claimant’s residual functional capacity, i.e., the claimant’s ability to do physical and mental work activities on a sustained basis despite limitations from her impairments. 20 C.F.R. § 416.920(e). ... At the fourth step, if the claimant’s impairment or combination of impairments does not prevent her from doing her past relevant work, the claimant is not disabled. 20 C.F.R. §§ 416.920(e)–(f). For the fifth and final step, even if the claimant’s impairment does prevent her from doing her past relevant work, the claimant is not disabled if other work exists in the national economy that the claimant can perform. 20 C.F.R. § 416.920(g). See Abbott, 905 F.2d at 923.”

Section 416.920 requires disability claims to be evaluated through five steps addressing substantial gainful activity, severe impairment, listed impairments, residual functional capacity and past work, and whether other work exists in the national economy.

White · filed 2026-02-02(b), (c), (d), (e), (g)

Consideration of disability claims follows a five-step review process. 20 C.F.R. § 416.920. First, the claimant must demonstrate that she is not currently engaged in “substantial gainful activity” at the time of the disability application. 20 C.F.R. § 416.920(b). Second, the claimant must show that she suffers from a “severe impairment” in order to warrant a finding of disability. 20 C.F.R. § 416.920(c). A “severe impairment” is one that “significantly limits . . . physical or mental ability to do basic work activities.” Abbott v. Sullivan, 905 F.2d 918, 923 (6th Cir. 1990) (quoting 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1520(c) and 416.920(c)). ... Third, if the claimant is not performing substantial gainful activity, has a severe impairment that is expected to last for at least twelve months, and the impairment, or combination of impairments, meets or medically equals a required listing under 20 CFR Part 404, Subpart P, Appendix 1, the claimant is presumed to be disabled regardless of age, education or work experience. See 20 C.F.R. § 416.920(d). ... Before considering Step Four, the ALJ must determine the claimant’s residual functional capacity, i.e., the claimant’s ability to do physical and mental work activities on a sustained basis despite limitations from her impairments. 20 C.F.R. § 416.920(e). ... At the fourth step, if the claimant’s impairment or combination of impairments does not prevent her from doing her past relevant work, the claimant is not disabled. 20 C.F.R. §§ 416.920(e)–(f). For the fifth and final step, even if the claimant’s impairment does prevent her from doing her past relevant work, the claimant is not disabled if other work exists in the national economy that the claimant can perform. 20 C.F.R. § 416.920(g).

Section 416.920 requires an ALJ to identify and evaluate severe impairments at Step Two and determine the claimant’s residual functional capacity before Step Four.

Gilliam · filed 2026-04-07(c), (e)

Consideration of disability claims follows a five-step review process. 20 C.F.R. § 416.920. ... Second, the claimant must show that she suffers from a “severe impairment” in order to warrant a finding of disability. 20 C.F.R. § 416.920(c). A “severe impairment” is one that “significantly limits . . . physical or mental ability to do basic work activities.” Abbott v. Sullivan, 905 F.2d 918, 923 (6th Cir. 1990) (quoting 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1520(c) and 416.920(c)). ... Before considering Step Four, the ALJ must determine the claimant’s residual functional capacity, i.e., the claimant’s ability to do physical and mental work activities on a sustained basis despite limitations from her impairments. 20 C.F.R. § 416.920(e). ... After careful consideration, I conclude that the ALJ committed reversible error at Step Two and in developing the RFC.

Section 416.920 requires the SSA to evaluate disability claims through a five-step sequence addressing substantial gainful activity, severity, the listings, residual functional capacity, past relevant work, and other work in the national economy.

Kujawa · filed 2026-04-22

Consideration of disability claims follows a five-step review process. 20 C.F.R. § 416.920. First, the claimant must demonstrate that she is not currently engaged in “substantial gainful activity” at the time of the disability application. 20 C.F.R. § 416.920(b). Second, the claimant must show that she suffers from a “severe impairment” in order to warrant a finding of disability. 20 C.F.R. § 416.920(c). A “severe impairment” is one that “significantly limits . . . physical or mental ability to do basic work activities.” Abbott v. Sullivan, 905 F.2d 918, 923 (6th Cir. 1990) (quoting 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1520(c) and 416.920(c)). ... Third, if the claimant is not performing substantial gainful activity, has a severe impairment that is expected to last for at least twelve months, and the impairment, or combination of impairments, meets or medically equals a required listing under 20 CFR Part 404, Subpart P, Appendix 1, the claimant is presumed to be disabled regardless of age, education or work experience. See 20 C.F.R. § 416.920(d). ... Before considering Step Four, the ALJ must determine the claimant’s residual functional capacity, i.e., the claimant’s ability to do physical and mental work activities on a sustained basis despite limitations from her impairments. 20 C.F.R. § 416.920(e). ... At the fourth step, if the claimant’s impairment or combination of impairments does not prevent her from doing her past relevant work, the claimant is not disabled. 20 C.F.R. §§ 416.920(e)–(f). For the fifth and final step, even if the claimant’s impairment does prevent her from doing her past relevant work, the claimant is not disabled if other work exists in the national economy that the claimant can perform. 20 C.F.R. § 416.920(g). See Abbott, 905 F.2d at 923.

Section 416.920’s five-step process governs state Medicaid disability determinations through 42 C.F.R. § 435.541(d)(2).

Sutherland v. North Dakota Department of Human Services · filed 2004-11-19

The regulations specified in 42 C.F.R. § 435.541(d)(2) include 20 C.F.R. § 416.920, which implements the five-step sequential process for evaluating disability, and our law incorporates the federal definition for disability. ... We conclude that plain language requires the Department to follow the five-step sequential process for determining disability.

Section 416.920(2) applies the parallel sequential-evaluation regulatory scheme to applications for Supplemental Security Income disability benefits.

Borgos-Hansen v. Colvin · filed 2015-06-17(2)

A parallel regulatory scheme, codified at 20 C.F.R. § 416.920 et seq., applies to "an application for Supplemental Security Income disability benefits.” 20 C.F.R. § 416.920(2).

After a claimant proves the first four steps of disability, the burden shifts to the Commissioner at the fifth step to show that the claimant can perform other work.

Thomas Atha, Jr. v. Commissioner, Social Security Administration · filed 2015-06-26(a)(4)(v)

The claimant bears the burden to prove the first four steps. If the claimant does so, the burden shifts temporarily to the Commissioner to prove the fifth step. 20 C.F.R. § 416.920(a)(4)(v) & (g); see also Jones v. Apfel, 190 F.3d 1224, 1228 (11th Cir. 1999).

Section 416.920(a)(4) establishes a five-step sequential evaluation, with the claimant bearing the burden through step four and the Commissioner bearing it at step five.

Waddell v. Colvin · filed 2015-06-02(a)(4)

Regulations issued by the Commissioner establish a five-step sequential evaluation process to be followed in a disability case. 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1520(a)(4), 416.920(a)(4). The claimant bears the burden of proof at steps one through four, but the burden shifts to the Commissioner at step five.

Section 416.920(a) uses the residual functional capacity assessment at steps four and five to determine whether a claimant can perform past relevant work or adjust to other work in the national economy.

Fox v. Commissioner Social Security Administration · filed 2023-10-26(a)

The RFC is used at step four of the sequential analysis to determine if a claimant is able to perform past relevant work, and at step five to determine if a claimant can adjust to other work that exists in significant numbers in the national economy. 20 C.F.R. § 416.920(a).

Section 416.920(a)(4) permits an ALJ to make alternative findings at steps four and five when both find the claimant not disabled.

Daniel Richard Otero, Sr. v. Carolyn Colvin, Acting Commissioner, Social Security Administration · filed 2015-08-27(a)(4)

Accordingly, I conclude that the ALJ made no legal error here by finding Otero not disabled at both step four and step five.

Section 416.920(d) provides that a claimant who meets or medically equals a listed impairment is considered disabled without regard to age, education, or work experience.

Maneti v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2019-09-25(d)

Moreover, having found Plaintiff meets the criteria for disability based on a Listing Impairment, the inquiry ceases. 20 C.F.R. § 416.920(d) (providing claimant who meets or equals criteria of a Listing Impairment is considered disabled without regard to age, education, and work experience).

At step three, the ALJ must determine whether the claimant's impairment meets or equals a listed impairment; if it does, the claimant is disabled.

Shearer v. Saul · filed 2022-11-16(a)(4)(iii), (d)

At Step 3 of this sequential analysis, the ALJ is required to determine whether, singly or in combination, a claimant’s ailments and impairments are so severe that they are per se disabling and entitle the claimant to benefits. As part of this Step 3 disability evaluation process, the ALJ must determine whether a claimant’s alleged impairment is equivalent to a number of listed impairments, commonly referred to as listings, that are acknowledged as so severe as to preclude substantial gainful activity. ... First, if a claimant’s impairment meets or equals one of the listed impairments, the claimant is considered disabled per se and is awarded benefits. 20 C.F.R. §416.920(d); Burnett, 220 F.3d at 119.

At the listings step, meeting a listed impairment requires a finding of disability.

Yearling v. Colvin · filed 2017-11-09(d)

A finding that a claimant suffers from a listed impairment results in an automatic finding of disability. See 20 C.F.R. § 416.920(d).

Section 416.920(a)(4)(iii) requires an ALJ at step three to determine whether the claimant’s impairment meets or medically equals a listed impairment, applying the listing’s actual criteria without adding requirements that the listing does not contain.

Andis v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2024-09-25(a)(4)(iii)

At the third step, a claimant will be found disabled if her impairment meets or medically equals one of the listings in the Listing of Impairments. 20 C.F.R. § 416.920(a)(4)(iii); ... Listing 11.02(B) does not require any showing of marked limitations. ... The lack of articulation relating to Listing 11.02(B) combined with the conjunctive statement that Plaintiff does not meet Listing 11.02(B) and (D) because there is insufficient evidence of marked limitations leads to the conclusion that the ALJ improperly applied the marked limitations standard in his evaluation of whether Plaintiff’s migraines met the criteria under Listing 11.02(B) (Tr. 1070). Thus, the ALJ’s findings as to Listing 11.02(B) do not comport with applicable law and lack substantial evidence.

At step three, the regulation requires the ALJ to determine whether the claimant’s severe impairment or combination of impairments meets a listed impairment, with a qualifying impairment resulting in a finding of disability.

Arevalo v. Berryhill · filed 2018-01-30(a)(4)(iii)

In step three, the ALJ must determine whether the claimant’s severe impairment or impairments are such that a finding of disability is appropriate. See 20 C.F.R. § 416.920(a)(4)(iii). If the claimant’s severe impairments, individually or in combination, satisfy the requirements of a listing in Appendix 1 of Subpart P in 20 C.F.R. Part 404 (Appendix 1), then “the claimant is conclusively presumed to be disabled.” ... The court finds that the ALJ erred by failing to provide a thorough analysis explaining how Arevalo’s degenerative disc disease did not meet all of the requirements in Listing 1.04, Subsection A.

At step three, the ALJ must consider the claimant’s impairments singly and in combination when deciding whether they meet or medically equal a listed impairment.

ADRIANO v. COMMISSIONER OF SOCIAL SECURITY · filed 2020-07-31(d)

Still, the regulations require the ALJ to consider Adriano’s impairments not only on their own terms, but also in combination to determine if they meet or medically equal the severity of one of the listed impairments. A review of the decision does not indicate the ALJ ever considered whether Adriano’s disc degeneration, rheumatoid arthritis and fibromyalgia in concert would meet or medically equal the severity of one of the listed impairments.

Section 416.920(d) requires the ALJ at step three to determine whether the claimant's impairments meet or medically equal a listed impairment, and a claimant who satisfies a listing is deemed disabled.

Quintero v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2020-08-17(d)

At step three of the sequential evaluation, the ALJ must evaluate the claimant's impairments to determine whether they meet or medically equal any of the impairments listed in 20 C.F.R. Part 404, Subpart P, Appendix 1. 20 C.F.R. § 416.920(d); Tackett v. Apfel, 180 F.3d 1094, 1098 (9th Cir. 1999). If they do, the claimant is deemed disabled. 20 C.F.R. § 416.920(d). The burden of proof is on the claimant to establish he or she meets or equals any of the impairments in the listings. Tackett, 180 F.3d at 1098.

Section 416.920(a)(4)(iii) requires an ALJ at step three to determine whether a claimant meets or equals a listed impairment, but does not require the ALJ to address every listing or listings the claimant clearly does not meet.

Forman v. SSA · filed 2020-09-14(a)(4)(iii)

At step three of the five-step sequential process, the SSA regulations require the ALJ to determine if a claimant meets or equals a listing, but they “do not require the ALJ to address every listing,” or to “discuss listings that the applicant clearly does not meet.”

Section 416.920(a)(4)(iii) requires the ALJ to determine at step three whether a claimant’s impairments meet or equal a listed impairment; a boilerplate finding may suffice when the claimant presents no evidence supporting that conclusion and the decision otherwise discusses the relevant evidence and underlying findings.

Wasemiller v. Saul · filed 2021-03-24(a)(4)(iii)

The ALJ is obligated to consider the relevant evidence to determine whether a claimant's impairments meet or equal one of the specified impairments set forth in the listings. Generally, a “boilerplate finding is insufficient to support a conclusion that a claimant's impairment does not [meet or equal a listing].” However, the ALJ need not recite the reasons for her step-three determination under the listings portion of the decision so long as the relevant evidence and underlying findings are discussed in the ALJ's decision. Moreover, a boilerplate finding may be appropriate where a claimant fails to set forth any evidence for the ALJ to conclude an impairment could meet or equal a listing.

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

Gronau v. Kijakazi · filed 2022-05-10(a)(4)(iii)

At step three, the ALJ must determine if a claimant’s impairments meet or equal a listed impairment. 20 C.F.R. § 416.920(a)(4)(iii). ... Based on the August 2019 echocardiogram, which the ALJ did not discuss at step three or elsewhere in the decision, the ALJ erred in finding “the record does not demonstrate evidence of systolic or diastolic failure (4.02(A)).”

At step three, § 416.920(a)(4)(iii) requires the ALJ to determine whether the claimant's impairments meet or equal a listed impairment; if they do, § 416.920(d) requires a finding of disability without further inquiry.

Coleman v. Kijakazi · filed 2023-01-23(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, 180 F.3d at 1099. If a claimant meets or equals a Listing, the claimant is considered disabled without further inquiry. 20 C.F.R. § 416.920(d).

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

McDonald v. Commissioner Social Security Administration · filed 2023-03-24(a)(4)(iii)

At step three of the sequential evaluation process, the ALJ must consider whether a claimant’s severe impairments, either separately or in combination, meet or equal one of the presumptively disabling impairments listed in the regulations. 20 C.F.R. § 416.920(a)(4)(iii). “An ALJ must evaluate the relevant evidence before concluding that a claimant’s impairments do not meet or equal a listed impairment. A boilerplate finding is insufficient to support a conclusion that a claimant’s impairment does not do so.”

Section 416.920(e) requires an RFC finding to be based on all relevant medical and other evidence in the case record, rather than treating RFC as a medical determination.

Kelly v. Berryhill · filed 2019-07-31(e)

An RFC finding is not a medical determination and must be based upon “all the relevant medical and other evidence in [the] case record.” 20 C.F.R. § 416.920(e). ... Here, the Court finds that there is “more than a mere scintilla” of evidence to support the ALJ’s RFC determination, and, thus, will not reverse the ALJ’s decision.

Section 416.920(a)(4)(iv) makes the ALJ responsible for assessing a claimant’s residual functional capacity based on the evidence as a whole.

Puckett v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2022-09-15(a)(4)(iv)

Moreover, the Social Security Act and agency regulations require an ALJ to determine a claimant’s RFC based on the evidence as a whole. 42 U.S.C. § 423(d)(5)(B); 20 C.F.R. § 416.920(a)(4)(iv) (“the [ALJ] . . . is responsible for assessing your [RFC]”).

Section 416.920(e) requires an ALJ to assess a claimant’s residual functional capacity using all relevant medical and other evidence.

Higgins v. Colvin · filed 2019-09-16(e)

The SSA’s regulations expressly require ALJs to evaluate “all the relevant medical and other evidence” in making their residual functional capacity assessment, 20 C.F.R. § 416.920(e), “including [a claimant’s] medical history[] [and] the medical signs and laboratory findings,” id. § 404.1529(a).

Before proceeding to step four, the ALJ must assess the claimant’s residual functional capacity, including limitations from all impairments, even those that are not severe.

Aguirre v. Berryhill · filed 2019-10-10(e)

Before making the step four determination, the ALJ first must determine the claimant’s residual functional capacity (“RFC”). 20 C.F.R. § 416.920(e). The RFC is “the most [one] can still do despite [his or her] limitations” and represents an assessment “based on all the relevant evidence.” 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1545(a)(1), 416.945(a)(1). The RFC must consider all of the claimant’s impairments, including those that are not severe. 20 C.F.R. §§ 416.920(e), 416.945(a)(2); Social Security Ruling (“SSR”) 96-8p.

Before deciding at step four whether a claimant can perform past relevant work, the ALJ must determine the claimant’s residual functional capacity, considering all of the claimant’s impairments, including those that are not severe.

Ramirez v. Berryhill · filed 2019-10-25(e)

Before making the step four determination, the ALJ first must determine the claimant’s residual functional capacity (“RFC”). 20 C.F.R. § 416.920(e). The RFC is “the most [one] can still do despite [his or her] limitations” and represents an assessment “based on all the relevant evidence.” 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1545(a)(1), 416.945(a)(1). The RFC must consider all of the claimant’s impairments, including those that are not severe. 20 C.F.R. §§ 416.920(e), 416.945(a)(2); Social Security Ruling (“SSR”) 96-8p.

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

Deloza v. Berryhill · filed 2019-11-12(e)

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

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

Avinger v. Berryhill · filed 2019-12-17(e)

Before making the step four determination, the ALJ first must determine the claimant’s residual functional capacity (“RFC”). 20 C.F.R. § 416.920(e). The RFC is “the most [one] can still do despite [his or her] limitations” and represents an assessment “based on all the relevant evidence.” 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1545(a)(1), 416.945(a)(1). The RFC must consider all of the claimant’s impairments, including those that are not severe. 20 C.F.R. §§ 416.920(e), 416.945(a)(2); Social Security Ruling (“SSR”) 96-8p.

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

Riddles v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2019-12-30(e)

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

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

Otanez v. Berryhill · filed 2020-01-07(e)

Before making the step four determination, the ALJ first must determine the claimant’s residual functional capacity (“RFC”). 20 C.F.R. § 416.920(e). The RFC is “the most [one] can still do despite [his or her] limitations” and represents an assessment “based on all the relevant evidence.” 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1545(a)(1), 416.945(a)(1). The RFC must consider all of the claimant’s impairments, including those that are not severe. 20 C.F.R. §§ 416.920(e), 416.945(a)(2); Social Security Ruling (“SSR”) 96-8p.

Section 416.920(e) requires the ALJ to assess a claimant’s residual functional capacity before determining whether the claimant can perform past relevant work, considering all of the claimant’s impairments, including those that are not severe.

Herbon v. Berryhill · filed 2020-03-17(e)

Before making the step four determination, the ALJ first must determine the claimant’s residual functional capacity (“RFC”). 20 C.F.R. § 416.920(e). The RFC is “the most [one] can still do despite [his or her] limitations” and represents an assessment “based on all the relevant evidence.” 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1545(a)(1), 416.945(a)(1). The RFC must consider all of the claimant’s impairments, including those that are not severe. 20 C.F.R. §§ 416.920(e), 416.945(a)(2); Social Security Ruling (“SSR”) 96-8p.

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

Kozai v. Berryhill · filed 2020-04-06(e)

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

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

Davis Sr v. Saul · filed 2020-07-17(e)

Before making the step four determination, the ALJ first must determine the claimant’s residual functional capacity (“RFC”). 20 C.F.R. § 416.920(e). The RFC is “the most [one] can still do despite [his or her] limitations” and represents an assessment “based on all the relevant evidence.” 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1545(a)(1), 416.945(a)(1). The RFC must consider all of the claimant’s impairments, including those that are not severe. 20 C.F.R. §§ 416.920(e), 416.945(a)(2); Social Security Ruling (“SSR”) 96-8p.

Section 416.920(e) requires the ALJ to assess a claimant’s residual functional capacity between steps three and four, reflecting the claimant’s ability to perform physical and mental work activities on a sustained basis despite impairment-related limitations.

Williams v. SSA (Social Security Administration) · filed 2020-09-29(e)

Between steps three and four, the ALJ is required to consider a claimant’s residual functional capacity (RFC) pursuant to 20 C.F.R. § 416.920(e), or a claimant’s ability to perform physical and mental work activities on a sustained basis, despite any limitations from impairments.

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

Kolodziej v. Saul · filed 2020-10-29(e)

Before making the step four determination, the ALJ first must determine the claimant’s residual functional capacity (“RFC”). 20 C.F.R. § 416.920(e). The RFC is “the most [one] can still do despite [his or her] limitations” and represents an assessment “based on all the relevant evidence.” 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1545(a)(1), 416.945(a)(1). The RFC must consider all of the claimant’s impairments, including those that are not severe. 20 C.F.R. §§ 416.920(e), 416.945(a)(2); Social Security Ruling (“SSR”) 96-8p.

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

Garland v. Saul · filed 2020-11-09(e)

In addition, when assessing a claimant’s RFC, an ALJ must consider all of the claimant’s medically determinable impairments, both severe and non-severe. ... The court concludes that substantial evidence does not support the ALJ’s determination that Plaintiff’s sleep apnea is not a severe impairment. ... On remand, the ALJ should further address Plaintiff’s sleep apnea at step two of the sequential evaluation process and include any resulting limitations in a new RFC.

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

(SS) Hernandez v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2020-11-13(e)

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

Section 416.920(e) requires the ALJ to determine a claimant’s residual functional capacity based on all relevant medical and other evidence when the impairments do not meet or equal a listed impairment, including their combined effects.

COULOMBE v. SOCIAL SECURITY ADMINISTRATION COMMISSIONER · filed 2020-11-24(e)

As the First Circuit explained, when a Social Security claimant’s impairments do “not meet the conditions for a listed impairment, the ALJ’s next task [is] to determine [the claimant’s] ‘residual functional capacity based on all the relevant medical and other evidence in [the] case record.’” See Purdy v. Berryhill, 887 F.3d 7, 11 (1st Cir. 2018) (Souter, J.) (quoting 20 C.F.R. § 416.920(e)). Thus, the ALJ had no obligation to consider Ms. C.’s spinal impairments in isolation from her obesity.

When formulating a claimant’s residual functional capacity, an ALJ must consider all the evidence in the record.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

The RFC must consider all of the claimant’s impairments, including those that are not severe. 20 C.F.R. §§ 416.920(e), 416.945(a)(2); Social Security Ruling (“SSR”) 96–8p. ... Further, Plaintiff’s contention that the ALJ failed to consider the combined effect of her impairments is contrary to the record. Her claim proceeded past step two precisely because the ALJ considered the combined effect of independently non-severe impairments, and he evaluated evidence of all impairments at subsequent stages. AR 18. Thus, the ALJ clearly considered the combined effect of all impairments.

Section 416.920(e) permits an ALJ to assess residual functional capacity using all relevant medical and other evidence in the case record, without requiring a supporting medical opinion.

Burghduff v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2021-03-24(e)

Hence, the Commissioner’s regulations and rulings do not require a supporting medical opinion, but instead permit the ALJ to base his decision on all relevant evidence. 20 C.F.R. § 416.920(e) (stating that “we will assess the residual functional capacity based on all the relevant medical and other evidence in your case record”); 20 C.F.R. § 416.945(a)(3) (the adjudicator will assess the RFC based on all the relevant evidence in the case record); 20 C.F.R. § 416.913(a)(1), (4) (evidence that can be considered includes objective medical evidence, such as medical signs and laboratory findings; as well as evidence from nonmedical sources, including the claimant, such as from forms contained in the administrative record).

Section 416.920(e) requires the ALJ to determine a claimant’s residual functional capacity after finding that the claimant’s impairments do not meet or equal a listed impairment.

Munter v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2021-04-07(e)

Where, as here, an ALJ determines that a claimant’s medical impairments do not meet or equal an explicit list of impairments,4 The Code of Federal Regulations (“the regulations”) requires the ALJ to determine the claimant’s residual functional capacity (“RFC”). 20 C.F.R. § 416.920(e).

Section 416.920(e) requires the ALJ to determine the claimant’s residual functional capacity before deciding at step four whether the claimant can perform past relevant work, based on all relevant evidence and all impairments, including nonsevere impairments.

Grindey v. Saul · filed 2021-07-15(e)

Before making the step four determination, the ALJ first must determine the claimant’s residual functional capacity (“RFC”). 20 C.F.R. § 416.920(e). The RFC is “the most [one] can still do despite [his or her] limitations” and represents an assessment “based on all the relevant evidence.” 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1545(a)(1), 416.945(a)(1). The RFC must consider all of the claimant’s impairments, including those that are not severe. 20 C.F.R. §§ 416.920(e), 416.945(a)(2); Social Security Ruling (“SSR”) 96-8p. ... Missing from the ALJ’s analysis is any assessment of the duration of Plaintiff’s vision loss episodes and the resulting time off-task they can be expected to cause. The ALJ did not include in her hypothetical any limitation regarding time off-task due to visual loss episodes. (AR 49-52.) ... The ALJ’s RFC is not supported by substantial evidence nor is the ALJ’s hypothetical to the VE.

Section 416.920(e) requires the Commissioner to determine a claimant’s residual functional capacity before step four and consider all relevant medical and other evidence in doing so.

PEARLY v. COMMISSIONER OF SOCIAL SECURITY · filed 2021-07-29(e)

Prior to the fourth step, the Commissioner must determine the claimant’s “residual functional capacity” (“RFC”) to perform work activities despite the limitations from the claimant’s impairments. 20 C.F.R. §§ 416.920(e), 416.945. In considering a claimant’s RFC, the Commissioner must consider “all the relevant medical and other evidence” in the claimant’s record. 20 C.F.R. § 416.920(e). ... Here, the Court is unable to identify the evidence on which the ALJ based his RFC findings, and in particular, his conclusion that Plaintiff must be afforded 10% “off-task” time per day above normal breaks to change positions and use the bathroom. Tr. 16. ... Therefore, the ALJ appears to have impermissibly based this conclusion on layman speculation on the evidence.

Section 416.920(e) requires the ALJ to determine residual functional capacity by considering all relevant medical and other evidence and whether the claimant can perform available work despite the impairments.

Kinnebrew v. Commissioner of Social Security Administration · filed 2021-08-26(e)

To make a disability determination, an ALJ must first arrive at an RFC by considering all relevant medical and other evidence and determining whether a claimant is able to perform work available in the national economy, despite her impairments. 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520(e); 20 C.F.R. § 416.920(e).

Section 416.920(e) requires the ALJ to assess residual functional capacity using all relevant medical and other evidence, so the RFC need not perfectly correspond to any single medical opinion.

Pitts v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2021-09-24(e)

As a threshold matter, this Court notes that the ALJ is required to base a claimant’s RFC on the record as a whole and for this reason, an RFC need not “perfectly correspond” with any particular medical opinion. See Tricarico v. Colvin, 681 F. App’x 98, 101 (2d Cir. 2017) (citing Matta v. Astrue, 508 F. App’x 53, 56 (2d Cir. 2013); see also 20 C.F.R. § 416.920(e) (stating that “we will assess the residual functional capacity based on all the relevant medical and other evidence in your case record”) (emphasis added); 20 C.F.R. § 416.945(a)(3) (stating that the adjudicator will assess the RFC based on all the relevant evidence in the case record); 20 C.F.R. § 416.913(a)(1),(4) (stating that evidence that can be considered includes objective medical evidence, such as medical signs and laboratory findings; as well as evidence from nonmedical sources, including the claimant, such as from forms contained in the administrative record). ... An ALJ’s RFC determination need not be based on a medical opinion. Rather, an RFC based on treatment records, activities of daily living, portions of a medical opinion, or a combination thereof can survive judicial scrutiny.

Section 416.920(e) requires the ALJ to consider all relevant medical and other evidence in the case record when formulating the residual functional capacity.

Burnett v. Social Security Administration · filed 2021-09-28(e)

Such statements from family are still to be considered by the ALJ. Id., n.4 (“[C]urrent regulations continue to require the ALJ to consider ‘all the relevant medical and other evidence in your case record’ when formulating the RFC.”), quoting 20 C.F.R. §§ 416.920(e), 416.945(a)(3). Here, the ALJ specifically considered the third-party report and the hearing testimony of Claimant’s mother.

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

Okonski v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2021-10-25(e)

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

At step four, § 416.920(e) requires assessing the claimant’s sustained physical and mental work abilities despite limitations from all impairments, including nonsevere impairments.

Hall v. Saul · filed 2022-02-04(e)

Such an assessment requires a determination of a claimant’s ability to do physical and mental work activities on a sustained basis despite limitations from any and all of her impairments, including those that are not severe. See id. §§ 416.920(e), 416.945. ... The Court finds that the ALJ adequately accounted for all of plaintiff’s impairments and limitations, and thus properly performed the residual functional capacity assessment.

Section 416.920(e) requires the residual functional capacity assessment to consider all of a claimant’s impairments, including impairments found non-severe.

(SS) Huff v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2022-02-10(e)

The RFC must consider all of the claimant’s impairments, including those that are not severe. 20 C.F.R. §§ 416.920(e), 416.945(a)(2); Social Security Ruling (“SSR”) 96–8p. ... The ALJ erred in dismissing Plaintiff’s neurogenic bladder as non-severe at step two despite objective medical evidence and testimonial evidence of functional limitations attributable to the condition, namely increased need for bathroom breaks.

Section 416.920(e) requires the ALJ to determine a claimant’s residual functional capacity even when medical consultants have found the claimant not disabled.

Spivey v. Kijakazi · filed 2022-02-24(e)

However, this does not relieve the ALJ of the obligation to determine Plaintiff’s RFC. 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1520(e), 416.920(e).

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

(SS) Hensley v. Commisioner of Social Security · filed 2022-02-28(e)

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

Section 416.920(e) requires an RFC finding to be based on all relevant medical and other evidence in the case record.

Mastronardi v. Saul · filed 2022-03-28(e)

An RFC finding, which is not a medical determination, must be based upon “all the relevant medical and other evidence in [the] case record.” 20 C.F.R. § 416.920(e).

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

In applying § 416.920's sequential evaluation, moderate paragraph-B ratings at step three need not be copied verbatim into the RFC; the RFC must provide a more detailed, evidence-based translation of the claimant’s limitations for the later steps.

(SS) Garza v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2022-07-27(e)

First “[t]he mental RFC assessment used at steps 4 and 5 of the sequential evaluation process requires a more detailed assessment [than at steps two and three] by itemizing various functions contained in the broad categories found in paragraphs B and C of the adult mental disorders listings.” ... For that reason, a direct translation of the findings for the broad functional areas at step three into the concrete, functional limitations that must be identified in the RFC is untenable. ... Thus, to evaluate whether the ALJ properly encompassed certain paragraph B criteria limitations into the RFC determination, the Court must examine the challenged limitations within the context of the entire RFC determination and the ALJ’s evaluation of the medical evidence in this case, rather than applying a per se rule.

Section 416.920(a)(4)(iv) requires the ALJ to assess a claimant’s residual functional capacity based on all relevant evidence in the case record, including symptoms and medical-source statements.

Knight v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2022-07-26(a)(4)(iv)

The Social Security regulations, rulings, and Sixth Circuit precedent charge the ALJ with the final responsibility for determining a claimant’s residual functional capacity (RFC). See, e.g., 20 C.F.R. § 416.927(d)(2) (the final responsibility for deciding the RFC “is reserved to the Commissioner.”). Moreover, the Social Security Act and agency ... regulations require an ALJ to determine a claimant’s RFC based on the evidence as a whole. 42 U.S.C. § 423(d)(5)(B); 20 C.F.R. § 416.920(a)(4)(iv) (“the administrative law judge . . . is responsible for assessing your [RFC]”). The ALJ’s RFC assessment must be “based on all of the relevant evidence in the case record, including information about the individual’s symptoms and any ‘medical source statements’—i.e., opinions about what the individual can still do despite his or her impairment(s)—submitted by an individual’s treating source or other acceptable medical sources.”). Id. (footnote omitted).

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

(SS) Duron v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2022-08-03(e)

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

Section 416.920(e) requires residual functional capacity to be based on all relevant medical and other evidence in the claimant's case record.

Lee v. Kijakazi · filed 2022-08-25(e)

This evidence supports the ALJ’s conclusion that plaintiff was limited in his ability to interact with the public (people he would not know) but was not limited in his ability to interact co-workers and supervisors (people he would know). The ALJ appropriately based plaintiff’s RFC on all the relevant evidence in the record. See 20 C.F.R. § 416.920(e) (explaining that the RFC is “based on all the relevant medical and other evidence in your case record”).

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

(SS) Kumar v. Commissioner or Social Security · filed 2022-08-31(e)

Before making the step four determination, the ALJ first must determine the claimant’s RFC. ... The RFC must consider all of the claimant’s impairments, including those that are not severe. 20 C.F.R. §§ 416.920(e), 416.945(a)(2); Social Security Ruling (“SSR”) 96-8p, available at 1996 WL 374184 (Jul. 2, 1996). ... Here, the ALJ properly synthesized the medical and other evidence to reach the RFC determination, which is supported by substantial evidence in the record.

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

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

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

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

(SS) Villa v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2022-10-11(e)

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