Source: http://ks.findacase.com/research/wfrmDocViewer.aspx/xq/fac.20180712_0001004.DKS.htm/qx
Timestamp: 2019-04-25 18:08:08+00:00

Document:
This is an action for review of a final decision of the Commissioner of Social Security denying Plaintiff's claim for disability insurance benefits. The matter has been fully briefed and the court is prepared to rule. (Docs. 13, 14, 15.) For the reasons stated herein, the decision of the Commissioner is AFFIRMED.
The Commissioner has established a five-step sequential evaluation process to determine disability. 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520; Wilson v. Astrue, 602 F.3d 1136, 1139 (10th Cir. 2010). If at any step a finding of disability or non-disability can be made, the Commissioner will not review the claim further. At step one, the agency will find non-disability unless the claimant can show that he or she is not working at a “substantial gainful activity.” Williams v. Bowen, 844 F.2d 748, 750 (10th Cir. 1988). At step two, the agency will find non-disability unless the claimant shows that he or she has a severe impairment. At step three, the agency determines whether the impairment which enabled the claimant to survive step two is on the list of impairments presumed severe enough to render one disabled. Id. at 750-51. If the claimant's impairment does not meet or equal a listed impairment, the agency determines the claimant's residual functional capacity (“RFC”). 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520(e). The RFC assessment is used to evaluate the claim at both step four and step five. 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520(a)(4); § 404.1520(f), (g). At step four, the agency must determine whether the claimant can perform previous work. If a claimant shows that she cannot perform the previous work, the fifth and final step requires the agency to consider vocational factors (the claimant's age, education, and past work experience) and to determine whether the claimant is capable of performing other jobs existing in significant numbers in the national economy. Barnhart v. Thomas, 124 S.Ct. 376, 379-380 (2003).
At step four, the ALJ found Plaintiff was unable to perform any past relevant work. (R. at 46.) At step five, the ALJ found that, through the date Plaintiff was last insured, and considering Plaintiff's age, education, work experience, and RFC, there were jobs in significant numbers in the national economy that Plaintiff could perform, including Final Assembler (DOT 713.687-018), Document Preparer (DOT 249.587-018), and Administrative Support Worker (DOT 209.587-010). (R. at 47.) The ALJ thus found Plaintiff was not disabled within the meaning of the Social Security Act.
A. RFC - physical impairments.

References: § 404
 v. 
 v. 
 § 404
 § 404
 § 404
 v.