20 C.F.R. § 404.1525

Listing of Impairments in appendix 1

Read at: eCFRecfr.gov CornellLII GovInfogovinfo.gov CasesGoogle Scholar

(a) What is the purpose of the Listing of Impairments? The Listing of Impairments (the listings) is in appendix 1 of this subpart. It describes for each of the major body systems impairments that we consider to be severe enough to prevent an individual from doing any gainful activity, regardless of his or her age, education, or work experience.

(b) How is appendix 1 organized? There are two parts in appendix 1:

(1) Part A contains criteria that apply to individuals age 18 and over. We may also use part A for individuals who are under age 18 if the disease processes have a similar effect on adults and children.

(2) Part B contains criteria that apply only to individuals who are under age 18; we never use the listings in part B to evaluate individuals who are age 18 or older. In evaluating disability for a person under age 18, we use part B first. If the criteria in part B do not apply, we may use the criteria in part A when those criteria give appropriate consideration to the effects of the impairment(s) in children. To the extent possible, we number the provisions in part B to maintain a relationship with their counterparts in part A.

(c) How do we use the listings? (1) Most body system sections in parts A and B of appendix 1 are in two parts: an introduction, followed by the specific listings.

(2) The introduction to each body system contains information relevant to the use of the listings in that body system; for example, examples of common impairments in the body system and definitions used in the listings for that body system. We may also include specific criteria for establishing a diagnosis, confirming the existence of an impairment, or establishing that your impairment(s) satisfies the criteria of a particular listing in the body system. Even if we do not include specific criteria for establishing a diagnosis or confirming the existence of your impairment, you must still show that you have a severe medically determinable impairment(s), as defined in § 404.1521.

(3) In most cases, the specific listings follow the introduction in each body system, after the heading, Category of Impairments. Within each listing, we specify the objective medical and other findings needed to satisfy the criteria of that listing. We will find that your impairment(s) meets the requirements of a listing when it satisfies all of the criteria of that listing, including any relevant criteria in the introduction, and meets the duration requirement (see § 404.1509).

(4) Most of the listed impairments are permanent or expected to result in death. For some listings, we state a specific period of time for which your impairment(s) will meet the listing. For all others, the evidence must show that your impairment(s) has lasted or can be expected to last for a continuous period of at least 12 months.

(5) If your impairment(s) does not meet the criteria of a listing, it can medically equal the criteria of a listing. We explain our rules for medical equivalence in § 404.1526. We use the listings only to find that you are disabled or still disabled. If your impairment(s) does not meet or medically equal the criteria of a listing, we may find that you are disabled or still disabled at a later step in the sequential evaluation process.

(d) Can your impairment(s) meet a listing based only on a diagnosis? No. Your impairment(s) cannot meet the criteria of a listing based only on a diagnosis. To meet the requirements of a listing, you must have a medically determinable impairment(s) that satisfies all of the criteria in the listing.

(e) How do we consider your symptoms when we determine whether your impairment(s) meets a listing? Some listed impairments include symptoms, such as pain, as criteria. Section 404.1529(d)(2) explains how we consider your symptoms when your symptoms are included as criteria in a listing.

[71 FR 10428, Mar. 1, 2006, as amended at 76 FR 19696, Apr. 8, 2011; 82 FR 5868, Jan. 18, 2017]

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 1,332 cases (732 in the last 5 years), 1963–2026 · leading case: Andrew T. Wilson v. Jo Anne B. Barnhart, 284 F.3d 1219 (11th Cir. 2002).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

Andrew T. Wilson v. Jo Anne B. Barnhart, 284 F.3d 1219 (11th Cir. 2002). · cites it 3× “See 20 C.F.R. § 404.1525 (a). Part A of the Listing of Impairments contains medical criteria that apply to adults age 18 and over.”

Michelle Jeske v. Andrew M. Saul, 955 F.3d 583 (7th Cir. 2020). · cites it 2× “Step-Three Listing Determination At step three, the ALJ must determine whether the claim- ant’s impairments are “severe enough” to be presumptively disabling—that is, so severe that they prevent a person from doing any gainful activity and make further inquiry into whether the…”

Brenda Wilder v. Kilolo Kijakazi, 22 F.4th 644 (7th Cir. 2022). · cites it 2× “” 20 C.F.R. § 404.1525 (a). An individual who satisfies one of the Listings (or its equivalent) is conclusively presumed to be disabled.”

Tackett v. Apfel, 180 F.3d 1094 (9th Cir. 1999). · cites it 2× “” See 20 C.F.R. § 404.1525 . If a claimant meets or equals a listed impairment he or she will be found disabled at this step without further inquiry.”

Stacy Lewis v. Nancy Berryhill, 858 F.3d 858 (4th Cir. 2017). “When assessing the claimant’s RFC, the ALJ must examine “all of [the claimant’s] medically determinable impairments of which [the ALJ is] aware,” 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1525 (a)(2), 416.925(a)(2), “including those not labeled severe at step two.”

Deborah L. Burch v. Jo Anne B. Barnhart, Comm'r of Soc. Sec., 400 F.3d 676 (9th Cir. 2005). “20 C.F.R. § 404.1525 (d). The district court correctly explained that Burch “bears the burden of proving that .”

Debbra Hill v. Michael Astrue, 698 F.3d 1153 (9th Cir. 2012). “Part 404, Subpart P, Appendix 1, and described at 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1525 , 404.1526, 416.925, 416.”

Lax v. Astrue, 489 F.3d 1080 (10th Cir. 2007). “05, Mental Retardation, states: [mjental retardation refers to significantly subaverage general intellectual functioning with deficits in adaptive functioning initially manifested during the developmental period; i.”

L.D.R. by WAGNER v. Berryhill, 920 F.3d 1146 (7th Cir. 2019). “20 C.F.R. § 404.1525 (a). A claimant may be eligible for benefits if an impairment meets or equals an impairment found in the listing of impairments.”

Peggy Mayes v. Larry G. Massanari, Comm'r of Soc. Sec., 276 F.3d 453 (9th Cir. 2001). “Part 404 (2000); 20 C.F.R. § 404.1525 (2000) (“The Listing of Impairments describes, for each of the major body systems, impairments which are considered severe enough to prevent a person from doing any gainful activity”).”

Patricia A. Mastro v. Kenneth S. Apfel, Comm'r of Soc. Sec., No, 270 F.3d 171 (4th Cir. 2001). “” 20 C.F.R. § 404.1525 . “Medical equivalence must be based on medical findings .”

Randall v. Astrue, 570 F.3d 651 (5th Cir. 2009). · cites it 3× “Listing; 20 C.F.R. § 404.1525 (c)(1). Listing 12 addresses nine specific mental disorders and begins with a set of introductory instructions, see C.”

Show all 1,332 citing cases →

— 20 C.F.R. § 404.1525(a) — 9 cases

Avery v. Astrue, 313 F. App'x 114 (10th Cir. 2009).

Charles E. Fountain v. R.R. Ret. Bd., 81 F.3d 784 (8th Cir. 1996).

Nalley v. Schweiker, 575 F. Supp. 840 (W.D. Ky. 1983).

(SS) Abdulkareem v. Comm'r of Soc. Sec. (E.D. Cal. 2022).

Rivera v. Comm'r of Soc. Sec. (S.D.N.Y. 2019).

— 20 C.F.R. § 404.1525(c) — 1 case

Peggy Ann Nilson v. Sec'y of Health & Human Servs., 843 F.2d 1392 (6th Cir. 1988).

— 20 C.F.R. § 404.1525(c)(3) — 1 case

Ford v. Comm'r of Soc. Sec. (W.D. Ky. 2021).

— 20 C.F.R. § 404.1525(c)(4) — 1 case

Duevalle v. Comm'r of Soc. Sec. (N.D. Ind. 2021).

— 20 C.F.R. § 404.1525(d) — 7 cases

Berry v. Comm'r of Soc. Sec., 34 F. App'x 202 (6th Cir. 2002).

Owens v. Comm'r of Soc. Sec. (D.N.J. 2022).

Dechbery v. Comm'r of the Soc. Sec. Admin. (E.D.N.Y 2020).

Lakoi v. Comm'r of Soc. Sec. (W.D. Wash. 2021).

Craig v. Comm'r of Soc. Sec. (W.D. Wash. 2021).

— 20 C.F.R. § 404.1525(e) — 2 cases

Edward Nelson v. Otis R. Bowen, Sec'y of Health & Human Servs., 855 F.2d 503 (7th Cir. 1988).

Terry v. Blair v. Shirley S. Chater, Comm'r of the Soc. Sec. Admin., 1, 68 F.3d 483 (10th Cir. 1995).

Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.