context: The administrative law judge had no evidence of functional limitations from the alleged incontinence or mental impairments. As a result, the administrative law judge did not err by assessing the residual functional capacity without incorporating limitations from incontinence.
citation_a.signal: see
citation_a.identifier: 844 F.2d 664, 666
citation_a.parenthetical: upholding a finding that incontinence did not render the claimant disabled notwithstanding evidence of bladder leakage and possible need for a second operation
citation_a.sentence: See Gregory v. Bowen, 844 F.2d 664, 666 (9th Cir.1988) (upholding a finding that incontinence did not render the claimant disabled notwithstanding evidence of bladder leakage and possible need for a second operation); see also SSR 96-8P, 1996 WL 374184, at *1 (1996) (“The RFC assessment considers only functional limitations and restrictions that result from an individual’s medically determinable impairment ... including the impact of any related symptoms.”).
citation_b.signal: see also
citation_b.identifier: 1996 WL 374184, at *1
citation_b.parenthetical: "The RFC assessment considers only functional limitations and restrictions that result from an individual's medically determinable impairment ... including the impact of any related symptoms."
citation_b.sentence: See Gregory v. Bowen, 844 F.2d 664, 666 (9th Cir.1988) (upholding a finding that incontinence did not render the claimant disabled notwithstanding evidence of bladder leakage and possible need for a second operation); see also SSR 96-8P, 1996 WL 374184, at *1 (1996) (“The RFC assessment considers only functional limitations and restrictions that result from an individual’s medically determinable impairment ... including the impact of any related symptoms.”).