Section 404.1529 - How we evaluate symptoms, including pain

4 Citing briefs

  1. Mihlfeld v. Social Security Administration, Commissioner of

    MEMORANDUM in Support of Motion re MOTION for Summary Judgment

    Filed March 19, 2014

    Plaintiff’s allegations of disabling pain are inconsistent with the record as a whole. See See Hardaway v. Sec’y of Health & Human Servs., 823 F.2d 922, 928 (6th Cir. 1987) (claimant deemed not credible where the record revealed contradictory statements); 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1529(c)(4), 416.929(c)(4) (conflicts between Plaintiff’s statements and the rest of the evidence may be considered in evaluating the extent to which the symptoms are of a disabling severity); SSR 96-7p, 1996 WL 374186 (S.S.A.), at *5 (1996) (the consistency of Plaintiff’s own statements with information contained in the record bears upon his credibility).

  2. Wilson v. Colvin(CONSENT)

    BRIEF/MEMORANDUM in Support of the Commissioner's Decision

    Filed November 16, 2016

    The ALJ found that Plaintiff met the pain standard, and then continued in the analysis and evaluated Plaintiff's credibility. See 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1529(c)(1), 416.929(c)(1).

  3. Pham v. Berryhill

    Cross MOTION for Summary Judgment

    Filed May 12, 2017

    Congress expressly prohibits granting disability benefits based on a claimant’s subjective complaints. See 42 U.S.C. § 423(d)(5)(A) (“An individual’s statement as to pain or other symptoms shall not alone be conclusive evidence of disability”); 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1529(a), 416.929(a) (an ALJ will consider all of a claimant’s statements about symptoms including pain, but statements about pain or other symptoms “will not alone establish” claimant’s disability).

  4. Pham v. Nguyen

    MOTION for Summary Judgment

    Filed January 17, 2017

    Indeed, the regulations specifically prohibit rejecting subjective pain testimony solely on the basis of objective medical evidence. 20 C.F.R. § 404.1529(c) (2) (we will not reject your statements about the intensity and persistence of your pain or other symptoms or about the effect Case 3:15-cv-02107-BAS-DHB Document 22-1 Filed 01/17/17 PageID.495 Page 7 of 13 -8- 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 your symptoms have on your ability to work solely because the available objective medical evidence does not substantiate your statements). Thus, the assertion of the ALJ that Rosie Pham‟s testimony is not credible because it is inconsistent with the objective medical evidence is always legally insufficient to find Ms. Pham not credible.