Oct. 17, 2013) (“[Evidence of a claimant’s ability to complete household chores does not defeat a claim for disability, ‘as people should not be penalized for enduring the pain of their disability in order to care for themselves.’ ”) (quoting Woodford, 93 F.Supp.2d at 529); Balsamo v. Chafer, 142 F.3d 75, 81 (2d Cir.1998) (“‘When a disabled person gamely chooses to endure pain in order to pursue important goals,’ such as attending church and helping his wife on occasion go shopping for their family, ‘it would be a shame to hold this endurance against him in determining benefits unless him conduct truly showed that he is capable of working.’ ”) (quoting Nelson v. Bowen, 882 F.2d 45, 49 (2d Cir.1989); Murdaugh v. Secretary of Dep’t of Health & Human Servs., 837 F.2d 99,102 (2d Cir.1988) (<HOLDING>)). In sum, “ALJ [Cohen] did not identify what
holding that employees requests for accommodation were not protected activity because the evidence did not show that he had a reasonable good faith belief that he was disabled or perceived as disabled holding that the second prong of the c criteria in section 1205 was satisfied where the claimant was limited to light or sedentary work holding that plaintiff could not show that he was disabled because he conceded that he could do his job despite his impairment holding that a claimant who watered a garden occasionally visited friends and was able to get on and off an examination table was disabled because he could not perform sedentary work holding that claimants limited availability did not remove him from labor market and claimant was thus able and available for work