Opinion ID: 2808322
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 4

Heading: Consideration of the Record as a Whole

Text: Finally, Wright argues that the ALJ failed to consider the record as a whole when determining Wright's RFC. The only argument not already addressed above is Wright's contention that the ALJ failed to take Wright's obesity into account. The record indicates this argument is without merit. 'We have held that when an ALJ references the claimant's obesity during the claim evaluation process, such review may be sufficient to avoid reversal.' Heino v. Astrue, 578 F.3d 873, 881 (8th Cir. 2009) (quoting Brown ex rel. Williams v. Barnhart, 388 F.3d 1150, 1153 (8th Cir. 2004)). The ALJ explicitly stated that he considered the combined effects of the claimant's obesity with the claimant's other impairments when determining that he retains the ability to perform a range of sedentary work within the limitations identified. As we have discussed above, the ALJ properly considered the record as -13- a whole. Wright's disagreements with the ALJ's conclusions made from its review of the entire record do not mean the ALJ did not consider the whole record.