6 canonical passages across 3 cases, quoted by 42 opinions in total. These passages cluster together because the same opinions keep quoting them side by side — they state parts of one doctrine. The anchor passage is from Pompa v. Commissioner of Social Security.
| # | Case | Flag | Canonical passage | Citers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Pompa v. Commissioner of Social Security Anchor | green | “because the alj found that pompa had a severe impairment at step two of the analysis, the question of whether the alj characterized any other alleged impairment as severe or not severe is of little consequence.” | 18 |
| 2 | Fisk v. Barnhart | green | “and when an alj considers all of a claimant's impairments in the remaining steps of the disability determination, an alj's failure to find additional severe impairments at step two ' not constitute reversible error.” | 10 |
| 3 | Fisk v. Barnhart | green | “when an alj considers all of a claimant's impairments in the remaining steps of the disability determination, an alj's failure to find additional severe impairments at step two ' not constitute reversible error.” | 4 |
| 4 | Pompa v. Commissioner of Social Security | green | “once the alj determines that a claimant has at least one severe impairment, the alj must consider all impairments, severe and non-severe, in the remaining teps.” | 4 |
| 5 | Cynthia Winn v. Comm'r of Social Security | green | “he alj's step-four determination regarding winn's rfc did not consider winn's mental impairments in a meaningful way.” | 3 |
| 6 | Pompa v. Commissioner of Social Security | green | “because the alj found that had a severe impairment at step two of the analysis, the question of whether the alj characterized any other alleged impairment as severe or not severe is of little consequence.” | 3 |
A red or yellow flag on a member means the underlying case has negative treatment — for those, check the case page before relying on the passage.