A Pennsylvania court sent an SSDI denial back for further proceedings because the record did not adequately support the ALJ’s assessment of the claimant’s work capacity.

An incomplete hearing record mattered when an ALJ relied on missing testimony to assess a claimant’s ability to interact at work. A Wisconsin federal court ordered a complete transcript or a new hearing, followed by a new decision.

In Fain v. Bisignano, the Ninth Circuit explained why an ALJ must give reasons for rejecting competent lay testimony—and why a partner’s specific observations mattered.

A California federal court ordered another review of an SSDI denial after finding gaps in how the ALJ evaluated daily activities, normal findings, and brief hearing observations.

A federal court remanded an SSDI claim after the ALJ relied on limited ongoing mental health treatment without examining whether the claimant’s impairments affected his pursuit of care. The decision illustrates why treatment history must be evaluated in context.

An Ohio federal court held that limiting how often a claimant interacts with others does not necessarily address how demanding those interactions may be. Because the ALJ did not explain the omitted restriction or test it with the vocational expert, the case returned for further proceedings.