Christopher Jozefyk v. Nancy Berryhill, 923 F.3d 492

Claimant Christopher Jozefyk applied for DIB and SSI asserting physical and mental impairments (depression, anxiety, avoidant personality), focusing his appeal on mental-health limitations.
Psychological evaluations (Drs. Camp, Hitch) and agency reviewers found anxiety and depressive disorders; memory and cognitive testing largely normal; agency psychologists found moderate limits in concentration, persistence, or pace and moderate difficulty in social settings.
Jozefyk appeared pro se at the ALJ hearing after receiving SSA written notices about the right to counsel; he declined continuance and proceeded without an attorney.
The ALJ found severe impairments but not disabling, rated moderate limitations in social functioning and concentration/persistence/pace, and assessed an RFC allowing medium work with restrictions: simple, routine, repetitive tasks; no public contact; only occasional contact with coworkers/supervisors and a workplace separation of 10–15 feet.
A vocational expert testified that with those limitations jobs existed in the national economy; the ALJ denied benefits and the Appeals Council and district court affirmed.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether ALJ obtained a valid waiver of right to counsel	Jozefyk: ALJ failed to secure adequate on-the-record waiver and should have reiterated waiver warnings	Commissioner: SSA sent detailed written notices including "Your Right to Representation" pamphlet; claimant was advised and knowingly waived	Court: Waiver valid—written notices plus on-the-record confirmation sufficed and no prejudice shown
Whether RFC failed to account for moderate limitations in concentration, persistence, or pace	Jozefyk: RFC omitted accommodations for fatigue, attention deficits, and other concentration-related symptoms	Commissioner: Medical evidence showed intact memory and only mild impairments; ALJ included limitations addressing claimant's demonstrated symptoms	Court: RFC adequately reflected limitations supported by evidence; any error would be harmless absent specific work restrictions tied to record

Binion v. Shalala, 13 F.3d 243 (7th Cir.) (outlines required waiver disclosures for right-to-counsel waiver)
Skinner v. Astrue, 478 F.3d 836 (7th Cir.) (describing waiver elements claimants must be advised of)
Yurt v. Colvin, 758 F.3d 850 (7th Cir.) (ALJ must account for limitations supported by record when assessing RFC)
Varga v. Colvin, 794 F.3d 809 (7th Cir.) (warning that generic limitations may not capture moderate limits in concentration/persistence/pace)
Johansen v. Barnhart, 314 F.3d 283 (7th Cir.) (upholding RFC that accommodated documented psychological limitations)
McKinzey v. Astrue, 641 F.3d 884 (7th Cir.) (harmless-error standard where plaintiff fails to show how additional restrictions would change outcome)
Biestek v. Berryhill, 139 S. Ct. 1148 (Sup. Ct.) (addressed standards for evaluation of evidence in Social Security proceedings)