20 C.F.R. § 260.6

Time limits for issuing a hearing decision

Read at: eCFRecfr.gov CornellLII GovInfogovinfo.gov CasesGoogle Scholar

(a) General. The hearings officer shall make every effort to issue a decision within 45 days after the hearing is held.

(b) Submission of additional evidence. If the hearings officer requests additional evidence, he or she shall do so within 30 days after the hearing is held and he or she shall make every effort to issue the hearing decision within 45 days after the additional evidence is received and the period for comment has ended. If the claimant wishes to submit additional evidence or written statements of fact or law, the hearings officer shall make every effort to issue the hearing decision within 45 days after the written statements are received or the additional evidence is received and the period for comment has ended.

(c) Supplemental hearing. If on the basis of additional evidence the hearings officer decides a supplemental hearing is necessary, the supplemental hearing will be held within 30 days after the receipt of the additional evidence and the hearings officer shall make every effort to issue a decision within 30 days after the supplemental hearing is held.

(d) Reassignment of case to another hearings officer. If, after a hearing has been held, it is necessary to reassign a case to another hearings officer due to the unavailability of the original hearings officer (e.g., resignation, retirement, illness), the case will be promptly reassigned. The new hearings officer shall make every effort to issue a hearing decision within 30 days after the reassignment.

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 1 case, 1983–1983 · leading case: Denberg v. United States R.R. Ret. Bd., 696 F.2d 1193 (7th Cir. 1983).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

Denberg v. United States R.R. Ret. Bd., 696 F.2d 1193 (7th Cir. 1983). · cites it 2× “4 , and then to the Board itself, see 20 C.F.R. § 260.6 , but instead he and his wife brought this suit in federal district court in 1976 challenging the differential treatment of husbands and wives under the statute as unconstitutional.”

Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.