Holding that "disability claimants" are responsible for making "a threshold showing that their 'medically determinable' impairments are severe enough to satisfy the regulatory standards"
Holding that, when "presented with the not uncommon situation of conflicting medical evidence . . . [t]he trier of fact has the duty to resolve that conflict"
Holding that the Law Judge logically reasoned that the ability to engage in certain activities was inconsistent with the plaintiff's allegations of disabling pain and physical limitations
470 U.S. 729 (1985) Cited 1,890 times 1 Legal Analyses
Holding that the Hobbs Act vests in the court of appeals initial judicial review authority over an NRC order denying a petition under 10 C.F.R. § 2.206 for suspension of an operating license
Holding that ALJ has the discretion to assess the validity of an IQ test result and is not required to accept it even if it is the only test in the record
Holding that the court is not to "undertake to reweigh conflicting evidence, make credibility determinations, or substitute [its] judgment for that of" the agency
Holding that "[t]he ALJ improperly reduced the two-step evaluation procedure mandated by the Regulations into solely consideration of the remaining factors in the Regulations, such as 'supportability' and 'consistency' factors"
Describing administrative process for evaluating degree of functional limitations and severity of mental impairments and providing that the ALJ's written decision must include these determinations