BLOG

I've been sitting with a recent Seventh Circuit decision for a while now, and I can't shake it. The court spends page after page explaining why the ALJ got it wrong. Not just one mistake—several. The opinion walks through how the ALJ reversed the regulatory framework for evaluating medical opinions, failed to properly address supportability and consistency, applied inconsistent reasoning across the decision, failed to build a logical bridge between the evidence and the conclu

The Ninth Circuit handed down a decision on July 1 in Allen v. Bisignano that's worth a quick read if you're briefing symptom testimony or medical opinion challenges. It's not a case that breaks new legal ground, it's a roadmap of what an ALJ decision looks like when it survives review because every finding is tied back to the record. The Facts The claimant alleged disability based on mental health impairments and arm pain. The ALJ ran the five-step sequential evaluation and

The Ninth Circuit recently handed down a decision in Starkweather v. Bisignano that every Social Security disability appellate practitioner should read, not because it changes the law, but because it illustrates exactly how procedural missteps and the harmless error doctrine can swallow otherwise valid arguments whole. What Happened Starkweather appealed the denial of her Social Security disability benefits. The ALJ discounted her treating physician's opinion, made a factual

The Eighth Circuit issued its decision in Bonham v. Bisignano on June 2, 2026, and if you handle Social Security disability appeals, it's worth reading carefully. Not just the majority. Especially the dissent. Here's what happened, why the dissent matters, and what this means for how you handle cases going forward. The Setup: A Long Wait and a Narrow Window A veteran with serious cervical spine issues waited five years to file for SSA disability, alleging an onset date back i

A new Ninth Circuit decision came down on April 7, 2026, and if you're handling Social Security disability claims, it's worth a careful read. Cloninger v. Bisignano is the kind of case that doesn't make headlines, but its logic will be familiar, and cautionary, to any practitioner in this space. Here's the short version: Cloninger applied for disability insurance benefits under Title II. The ALJ denied her claim. The district court upheld it. The Ninth Circuit affirmed. The r

If you represent claimants in childhood Social Security disability cases, the Ninth Circuit's recent decision in Jenson v. Bisignano is one you'll want to pull up and annotate. It's a unanimous affirmance that touches nearly every major stage of the childhood disability analysis, and it sends a clear message about just how much deference ALJs can command when the record is built the right way. Here's a close read of what happened, where the claimant's arguments fell short, a

In Shillington v. Bisignano, No. 24-6894 (9th Cir. 2026), the Ninth Circuit delivered a clear reminder to Social Security disability practitioners: overturning an Administrative Law Judge (ALJ) decision remains an uphill battle — even when errors exist. For claimants and attorneys handling SSDI appeals in the Ninth Circuit, this case reinforces long-standing principles about the deferential “substantial evidence” standard of review. Here’s a detailed breakdown of what happene

The United States Court of Appeals for the United States Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit recently issued a non-published decision in Varnon v. Commissioner of Social Security that highlights just how deferential the “substantial evidence” standard can be in Social Security disability appeals. For claimants and attorneys alike, the decision serves as an important reminder: even when the record contains conflicting evidence, courts often defer to the Administrative

Sometimes Social Security appeals feel routine—until a procedural issue forces everyone to slow down. The Sixth Circuit did exactly that in Follen v. Commissioner of Social Security (No. 25-3135, Feb. 11, 2026), issuing a reminder that § 405(g) only authorizes two kinds of remands—and courts cannot invent a third. What Happened in Follen After answering the complaint, the Commissioner moved for a remand so the ALJ could “further articulate” the persuasiveness of the evidence

This Ninth Circuit memorandum opinion doesn’t break new legal ground—but it reinforces several recurring themes in social security appeals, especially when records are thin and arguments are underdeveloped. Key Takeaways Appeals fail when records lack support and arguments are weak. Claimants must clearly articulate legal theories at every step. The Ninth Circuit will affirm favorable agency decisions when plaintiffs don’t carry their burden. Step Two: “Severe” Means Function

In Welch v. Bisignano (Jan. 9, 2026), the Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals upheld the denial of disabled child’s insurance benefits and Supplemental Security Income (SSI). While the outcome isn’t surprising, the reasoning offers important reminders for disability advocates—especially regarding how diagnoses, impairments, and medical evidence are evaluated. Diagnosis Alone Is Not a Medically Determinable Impairment (MDI) Q: Does having a diagnosis guarantee a medically determi

For practitioners litigating mental-health disability claims, the Fifth Circuit’s decision in Laird v. Bisignano, No. 25-50347 (5th Cir. Jan. 8, 2026), offers both guidance and caution. The case delves into the application of Listings 12.04 and 12.06, particularly under Paragraph C – marginal adjustment. Overview of the Case The claimant in Laird alleged disability based on bipolar disorder and anxiety, asserting that he met the criteria under Paragraph C of the relevant ment

Let’s take a trip back to 1971 , when a landmark U.S. Supreme Court case changed the way Social Security disability claims are handled. Richardson v. Perales was the first major case to address the procedural standards in Social Security disability hearings. The Court ruled that the Social Security Administration (SSA) could rely on written medical reports , even if the doctors who authored them did not testify in person. This decision has had a lasting impact on how disa

If you litigate Social Security Disability (SSD) cases in the Fourth Circuit, Hultz v. Bisignano is a decision you’ll want to keep close. This case builds on Arakas v. Commissioner and provides a strong reminder, and a warning, about how fibromyalgia claims must be properly evaluated. Hultz Reinforces Arakas: No Objective Evidence Requirement for Fibromyalgia The core error in Hultz involved the ALJ denying benefits by discounting subjective symptoms simply because they we

A Case That Shouldn’t Have Gone This Far It took a trip all the way to the Ninth Circuit to clarify something fundamental: Step Two of the Social Security disability process is a minimal threshold , not a high bar. Fortunately, Josephine Gerrard stepped in and delivered an outstanding oral argument on behalf of her client, Combest , leading to a much-needed remand . Background on the Claimant Combest suffers from the following medically documented impairments : Fibromyalgia

Every so often, a Social Security case reads less like routine administrative law and more like a cautionary tale about delay, broken process, and institutional fatigue. Hicks v. Commissioner, a decision issued by the Sixth Circuit, is one of those cases. For many disability claimants, the Social Security process is already difficult enough. Applicants are often navigating serious medical conditions, financial instability, and uncertainty about their future while attempting t

As the holiday season wraps up and the New Year approaches, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit quietly issued a decision that Social Security disability practitioners should not overlook: Nunez v. Commissioner of Social Security . This decision reinforces a critical point in Residual Functional Capacity (RFC) analysis: there must be a clear connection between acknowledged mental limitations and the actual functional limitations reflected in the RFC. Key Issue

A recent Ninth Circuit decision — Romero v. Bisignano (Nov. 12, 2025) — provides a timely reminder that reasoning-level conflicts between a claimant’s RFC and jobs identified at Step Five cannot be ignored. For Social Security Disability attorneys, especially those practicing in the Ninth Circuit, this case underscores two critical points: Reasoning levels still matter. ALJs must explicitly reconcile conflicts on the record. What Happened in Romero v. Bisignano? In Romero, th

When an ALJ acknowledges “moderate limitations” in areas like attention and attendance, but then crafts an RFC with no actual restrictions on staying on task or consistent attendance, the Second Circuit isn’t buying it. This decision is a must-read for anyone handling mental-health disability claims. ⚖️ The Big Picture In Nunez, the Second Circuit vacated the denial of benefits because the ALJ’s RFC failed to translate recognized limitations into meaningful functional restric

You know who gets genuinely excited about a good transferable skills analysis? This girl right here. And let me tell you, I've got a fresh-off-the-press Tenth Circuit remand that deserves a permanent spot in your Social Security litigation toolkit. The Case: Morgan v. Commissioner, SSA , No. 24-8085 (10th Cir. Oct. 9, 2025) Meet Rose Morgan. She spent 14 years as a buyer for the Wyoming Department of Transportation—not exactly a walk in the park. Her job involved soliciting b