How cited: Cluster 856431 · Go Syfert

Cluster 856431

green · 195 citation events across 10 courts. Showing the 50 strongest citers on record (one row per citing case, strongest signal kept).
All Green 50
green Chambers v. O'Malley (2025)
Quote Authority · D.D.C.
See Butler, 353 F.3d at 999 ; Schreiber v. Colvin, 519 F. App’x 951, 962 (7th Cir. 2013) (“To be sure, as we have indicated, the ALJ’s decision was not perfect.
“To be sure, as we have indicated, the ALJ’s decision was not perfect. But it was supported by substantial evidence, and we must nevertheless affirm the denial of benefits . . . .”
green Dunlap v. O'Malley (2025)
Quote Authority · D.D.C.
See Butler, 353 F.3d at 999 ; Schreiber v. Colvin, 519 F. App’x 951, 962 (7th Cir. 2013) (“To be sure, as we have indicated, the ALJ’s decision was not perfect.
“To be sure, as we have indicated, the ALJ’s decision was not perfect. But it was supported by substantial evidence, and we must nevertheless affirm the denial of benefits . . . .”
green Teske v. O'Malley (2024)
Quote Authority · E.D. Wis. · signal: cf.
Cf. Schreiber v. Colvin, 519 F. App’x 951, 959 (7th Cir. 2013) (“Here, while the ALJ did not explicitly weigh each factor in discussing [the doctor’s] opinion, his decision makes clear that he was aware of and considered many of the factors . . . .”).
“Here, while the ALJ did not explicitly weigh each factor in discussing [the doctor’s] opinion, his decision makes clear that he was aware of and considered many of the factors . . . .”
green Gonzalez v. Saul (2022)
Quote Authority · N.D. Ill. · 2 citations in this opinion
Apr. 10, 2014) (citing Schreiber v. Colvin, 519 Fed.Appx. 951, 961 (7th Cir. 2013) (“The ALJ’s credibility assessment need not be perfect; it just can’t be patently wrong.”)).
“The ALJ’s credibility assessment need not be perfect; it just can’t be patently wrong.”
green Coleman v. Saul (2021)
Quote Authority · N.D. Ill.
In sum, for all of these reasons, the ALJ’s subjective symptom analysis, while perhaps not perfect, was not “patently wrong.” See Dawson v. Colvin, No. 11 C 6671, 2014 WL 1392974 , at *10 (N.D.ILL Apr. 10, 2014) (citing Schreiber v. Colvin, 519 Fed.Appx. 951, 961 (7th Cir. 2013) (“The ALJ’s credibility assessment need not be perfect; it just can’t be patently wrong.”)).
“The ALJ’s credibility assessment need not be perfect; it just can’t be patently wrong.”
green Mendoza v. Saul (2019)
Quote Authority · N.D. Ill. · signal: see, e.g.
See, e.g., Schreiber v. Colvin, 519 F. App'x 951, 959 (7th Cir. 2013) (“our inquiry is limited to whether the ALJ sufficiently accounted for the factors in 20 C.F.R. § 404 .1527”); Elder v. Astrue, 529 F.3d 408, 415-16 (7th Cir. 2008) (affirming denial of benefits where ALJ discussed only two of the 20 CFR § 404.1527 factors as the Seventh Circuit conducted the necessary analysis and found that the opinions were not entitled to controlling weight).
“our inquiry is limited to whether the ALJ sufficiently accounted for the factors in 20 C.F.R. § 404 .1527”
green Jordan T. R. v. Frank Bisignano, Commissioner of Social Security (2026)
Rule Authority · S.D. Ind.
Schreiber v. Colvin, 519 F. App'x. 951, 959 (7th Cir. 2013).
green Sandy S. v. Frank Bisignano, Commissioner of Social Security (2026)
Rule Authority · N.D. Ill.
April 14, 2014) (citing Schreiber v. Colvin, 519 Fed.
green Judith T. v. Frank Bisignano, Commissioner of Social Security (2026)
Rule Authority · N.D. Ill.
April 10, 2014) (citing Schreiber v. Colvin, 519 F. App’x 951, 961 (7th Cir. 2013)).
green Thomas J. Snieg v. Frank J. Bisignano, Commissioner of Social Security (2025)
Rule Authority · E.D. Wis.
The level of analysis provided by the ALJ in this case is directly analogous to that provided by the ALJ in Schreiber v. Colvin, and in that case, the Seventh Circuit found the level of analysis plainly sufficient. 519 F. App’x 951, 958 (7th Cir. 2013).
green Coleman v. Bisignano (2025)
Rule Authority · N.D. Ill.
April 10, 2014) (citing Schreiber v. Colvin, 519 Fed.
green Givens v. Bisignano (2025)
Rule Authority · N.D. Ill.
April 10, 2014) (citing Schreiber v. Colvin, 519 F. Appx. 951, 961 (7th Cir. 2013)).
green Goers v. Bisignano (2025)
Rule Authority · N.D. Ill.
April 10, 2014) (citing Schreiber v. Colvin, 519 Fed.
green Madden v. Bisignano (2025)
Rule Authority · N.D. Ill.
April 10, 2014) (citing Schreiber v. Colvin, 519 F. Appx. 951, 961 (7th Cir. 2013)).
green Tripenfeldas v. Dudek (2025)
Rule Authority · N.D. Ill.
April 10, 2014) (citing Schreiber v. Colvin, 519 F. Appx. 951, 961 (7th Cir. 2013)).
green Vernon v. Social Security (2025)
Rule Authority · N.D. Ill.
When reviewing an ALJ’s weighing of medical opinions, this Court’s inquiry “is limited to whether the ALJ sufficiently accounted for the factors in 20 C.F.R. § 404.1527 . . . and built an ‘accurate and logical bridge’ between the evidence and [her] conclusion.” Schreiber v. Colvin, 519 Fed.
green Vazquez v. O'Malley (2025)
Rule Authority · N.D. Ill.
Apr. 10, 2014) (citing Schreiber v. Colvin, 519 F. Appx. 951, 961 (7th Cir. 2013)) (an ALJ’s credibility assessment “need not be perfect; it just can’t be patently wrong”).
green Wade v. O'Malley (2025)
Rule Authority · N.D. Ill.
April 10, 2014) (citing Schreiber v. Colvin, 519 F. Appx. 951, 961 (7th Cir. 2013)).
green Thoms v. O'Malley (2025)
Rule Authority · N.D. Ill.
April 14, 2014) (citing Schreiber v. Colvin, 519 Fed.
green Hultquist v. O'Malley (2025)
Rule Authority · N.D. Ill.
April 10, 2014) (citing Schreiber v. Colvin, 519 F. Appx. 951, 961 (7th Cir. 2013)).
green Stewart v. O'Malley (2025)
Rule Authority · N.D. Ill.
Apr. 10, 2014) (citing Schreiber v. Colvin, 519 F. Appx. 951, 961 (7th Cir. 2013)) (an ALJ’s credibility assessment “need not be perfect; it just can’t be patently wrong”).
green Stewart v. O'Malley (2025)
Rule Authority · N.D. Ill.
Apr. 10, 2014) (citing Schreiber v. Colvin, 519 F. Appx. 951, 961 (7th Cir. 2013)) (an ALJ’s credibility assessment “need not be perfect; it just can’t be patently wrong”).
green Funk v. O'Malley (2025)
Rule Authority · N.D. Ill. · 2 citations in this opinion
It is true that “an ALJ is supposed to consider a claimant’s limitations in performing household activities.” Schreiber v. Colvin, 519 F. App’x 951, 961 (7th Cir. 2013) (unpublished).
unpublished
green Mares v. O'Malley (2025)
Rule Authority · N.D. Ill.
April 10, 2014) (citing Schreiber v. Colvin, 519 F. Appx. 951, 961 (7th Cir. 2013)).
green WILLIAMS v. O'MALLEY (2024)
Rule Authority · S.D. Ind.
Schreiber v. Colvin, 519 F. App’x 951, 961 (7th Cir. 2013).
green McPhee v. Kijakazi (2023)
Rule Authority · N.D. Ill.
Schreiber v. Colvin, 519 F. App’x 951, 961 (7th Cir. 2013) (ALJ need only minimally articulate his reasons for his adverse credibility determination).
ALJ need only minimally articulate his reasons for his adverse credibility determination
green Curtis v. Kijakazi (2023)
Rule Authority · N.D. Ill.
Apr. 10, 2014) (citing Schreiber v. Colvin, 519 F. App’x 951, 961 (7th Cir. 2013)).
green Newstrand v. Saul (2023)
Rule Authority · N.D. Ill.
Nevertheless, an ALJ need not “blindly accept a treating physician’s opinion” Schreiber v. Colvin, 519 Fed.
green Campbell v. Saul (2023)
Rule Authority · N.D. Ill.
April 14, 2014) (citing Schreiber v. Colvin, 519 Fed.
green Edwards v. Saul (2023)
Rule Authority · N.D. Ill.
Apr. 10, 2014) (citing Schreiber v. Colvin, 519 F. App’x 951, 961 (7th Cir. 2013)).
green Christoffel v. Saul (2023)
Rule Authority · N.D. Ill.
Apr. 10, 2014) (citing Schreiber v. Colvin, 519 F. App’x 951, 961 (7th Cir. 2013)) (“The ALJ’s credibility assessment need not be perfect; it just can’t be patently wrong.”).
green Smith v. Kijakazi (2023)
Rule Authority · N.D. Ill.
However, an “ALJ need not blindly accept a treating physician’s opinion.” Schreiber v. Colvin, 519 F. App’x 951, 958 (7th Cir. 2013).
green Linton v. Saul (2023)
Rule Authority · N.D. Ill.
It is well-settled that “an ALJ need not blindly accept a treating physician’s opinion.” Schreiber v. Colvin, 519 Fed.Appx. 951, 958 (7th Cir. 2013).
green Harrell v. Saul (2023)
Rule Authority · N.D. Ill. · 2 citations in this opinion
It is well-settled that “an ALJ need not blindly accept a treating physician’s opinion.” Schreiber v. Colvin, 519 Fed.Appx. 951, 958 (7th Cir. 2013).
green Ritchie v. Kijakazi (2023)
Rule Authority · N.D. Ill.
Apr. 10, 2014) (citing Schreiber v. Colvin, 519 F. App'x 951, 961 (7th Cir. 2013)).
green Eck v. Saul (2023)
Rule Authority · N.D. Ill.
Apr. 10, 2014) (citing Schreiber v. Colvin, 519 F. App'x 951, 961 (7th Cir. 2013)) (“The ALJ’s credibility assessment need not be perfect; it just can’t be patently wrong.”). 3.
green Kovalsky v. Commissioner of Social Security (2023)
Rule Authority · N.D. Ill.
The ALJ’s analysis of Plaintiff’s subjective complaints does not have to be “perfect,” it only must not be “patently wrong.” See Schreiber v. Colvin, 519 F. App’x 951, 961 (7th Cir. 2013).
green Collis v. Commissioner of Social Security (2023)
Rule Authority · C.D. Ill.
See Craft v. Astrue, 539 F.3d 668, 680 (7th Cir. 2008) (explaining an ALJ “can appropriately consider a claimant’s daily activities when assessing his alleged symptoms” but must not “plac[e] undue weight on the claimant’s household activities in assessing the claimant’s ability to hold a job outside the home”); Schreiber v. Colvin, 519 F. App’x 951, 961 (7th Cir. 2013) (unpublished opinion) (explaining the ALJ’s adverse credibility finding was not patently wrong where the AL…
unpublished opinion
green Donnellon v. O'Malley (2023)
Rule Authority · N.D. Ill.
However, an “ALJ need not blindly accept a treating physician’s opinion.” Schreiber v. Colvin, 519 F. App’x 951, 958 (7th Cir. 2013).
green Taylor v. Saul (2023)
Rule Authority · N.D. Ill.
Apr. 10, 2014) (citing Schreiber v. Colvin, 519 F. App’x 951, 961 (7th Cir. 2013)).
green Mclemore v. Commissioner of Social Security (2023)
Rule Authority · N.D. Ill.
Apr. 10, 2014) (citing Schreiber v. Colvin, 519 F. App’x 951, 961 (7th Cir. 2013)) (an ALJ’s credibility assessment “need not be perfect; it just can’t be patently wrong.”); Bruno v. Saul, 817 F. App’x 238 , 241 (7th Cir. 2020) (quoting Biestek, 139 S. Ct. at 1154 ) (“Substantial evidence is not a high hurdle to clear – it means only ‘such relevant evidence as a reasonable mind might accept as adequate to support a conclusion.’”).
green Derry v. Saul (2023)
Rule Authority · N.D. Ill.
April 14, 2014) (citing Schreiber v. Colvin, 519 Fed.
green Ruiz, Jr. v. Saul (2022)
Rule Authority · N.D. Ill.
Apr. 10, 2014) (citing Schreiber v. Colvin, 519 F. App’x 951, 961 (7th Cir. 2013)).
green Caponigro v. Commissioner of Social Security (2022)
Rule Authority · N.D. Ind.
Schreiber v. Colvin, 519 F. App’x 951, 958 (7th Cir. 2013) (citing Schmidt v. Astrue, 496 F.3d 833, 842 (7th Cir. 2007)).
citing Schmidt v. Astrue, 496 F.3d 833, 842 (7th Cir. 2007)
green Kaur v. Saul (2022)
Rule Authority · N.D. Ill.
Apr. 10, 2014) (citing Schreiber v. Colvin, 519 F. App’x 951, 961 (7th Cir. 2013)) (“The ALJ’s credibility assessment need not be perfect; it just can’t be patently wrong.”).
green Hacker v. Saul (2022)
Rule Authority · N.D. Ill.
See, e.g., Vanprooyen v. Berryhill, 864 F.3d 567, 572 (7th Cir. 2017) (limitations articulated by the treating physician need not be accepted if they are not supported by the record); Skarbek v. Barnhart, 390 F.3d 500, 503 (7th Cir. 2004) (“An ALJ may discount a treating physician’s medical opinion . . . when the treating physician’s opinion is internally inconsistent.”) (citation omitted); Schreiber v. Colvin, 519 Fed.Appx. 951, 958-59 (7th Cir. 2013) (affirming ALJ’s decis…
affirming ALJ’s decision not to give controlling weight to a treating physician’s opinion where, among other things, claimant’s own reported activities of daily living were inconsistent with the treating physician’s assessment of claimant’s limitations
green Aguilar v. Saul (2022)
Rule Authority · N.D. Ill. · 2 citations in this opinion
It is well-settled that “an ALJ need not blindly accept a treating physician’s opinion.” Schreiber v. Colvin, 519 Fed.Appx. 951, 958 (7th Cir. 2013).
green McSwine v. Commissioner of Social Security (2022)
Rule Authority · N.D. Ill.
Apr. 10, 2014) (citing Schreiber v. Colvin, 519 F. App'x 951, 961 (7th Cir. 2013)).
green Brookins v. Saul (2022)
Rule Authority · N.D. Ill.
Apr. 10, 2014) (citing Schreiber v. Colvin, 519 F. App'x 951, 961 (7th Cir. 2013)).
green Gliwa v. Saul (2022)
Rule Authority · N.D. Ill.
Apr. 10, 2014) (citing Schreiber v. Colvin, 519 F. App’x 951, 961 (7th Cir. 2013)).