Other governmental agencies and nongovernmental entities—such as the Department of Veterans Affairs, the Department of Defense, the Department of Labor, the Office of Personnel Management, State agencies, and private insurers— make disability, blindness, employability, Medicaid, workers' compensation, and other benefits decisions for their own programs using their own rules. Because a decision by any other governmental agency or a nongovernmental entity about whether you are disabled, blind, employable, or entitled to any benefits is based on its rules, it is not binding on us and is not our decision about whether you are disabled or blind under our rules. Therefore, in claims filed (see § 404.614) on or after March 27, 2017, we will not provide any analysis in our determination or decision about a decision made by any other governmental agency or a nongovernmental entity about whether you are disabled, blind, employable, or entitled to any benefits. However, we will consider all of the supporting evidence underlying the other governmental agency or nongovernmental entity's decision that we receive as evidence in your claim in accordance with § 404.1513(a)(1) through (4).
[82 FR 5864, Jan. 18, 2017]
Notes of Decisions
Shanette Rogers v. Kilolo Kijakazi, 62 F.4th 872 (4th Cir. 2023).
· cites it 6× “4 USCA4 Appeal: 22-1264 Doc: 32 Filed: 03/20/2023 Pg: 5 of 18 commented — without elaboration or explanation — that it was “only partly persuasive.”
Billie J. Woods v. Nancy Berryhill, 888 F.3d 686 (4th Cir. 2018).
· cites it 2× “See 20 C.F.R § 404.1504 . But in considering a claim for Social Security disability insurance benefits, an ALJ must still "evaluate all the evidence in the case record that may have a bearing on our determination or decision of disability, including decisions by other…”
Jackie Noble v. Comm'r of Soc. Sec., 963 F.3d 1317 (11th Cir. 2020).
· cites it 3× “See 20 C.F.R. § 404.1504 (2016) (explaining that “[a] decision by any governmental agency .”
Jones v. Berryhill, 392 F. Supp. 3d 831 (M.D. Tenn. 2019).
· cites it 2× “5844 , 5848-49, 20 CFR §§ 404.1504 , 416.904, 404.1520c, 416.”
Quinn v. Colvin, 199 F. Supp. 3d 692 (W.D.N.Y. 2016).
· cites it 2× “” 20 C.F.R. § 404.1504 . (2) Application The Court finds no gap in the record as to Dr.”
Gregory Smith v. Carolyn W. Colvin, 756 F.3d 621 (8th Cir. 2014).
· cites it 2× “2006); 20 C.F.R. § 404.1504 . Treating physicians’ opinions are “entitled to special weight,” but they are not automatically controlling and the ALJ must evaluate the record as a whole.”
Durden v. Colvin, 191 F. Supp. 3d 429 (M.D. Penn. 2016).
“While disability determinations from other government agencies are not binding ( 20 CFR §§ 404.1504 , 416.904), they must be' considered.”
Bird v. Comm'r of Soc. Sec. Admin., 699 F.3d 337 (4th Cir. 2012).
“20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1504 , 404.1512(b)(5). Accordingly, under the principles governing SSA disability determinations, another agency’s disability determination “cannot be ignored and must be considered.”
Thomas E. McCartey v. Larry G. Massanari, Acting Comm'r of Soc. Sec. Admin., 298 F.3d 1072 (9th Cir. 2002).
“We agree with all of the other circuits that have considered the question and hold that although a VA rating of disability does not necessarily compel the SSA to reach an identical result, 20 C.F.R. § 404.1504 , the AU must consider the VA's finding in reaching his decision.”
— 20 C.F.R. § 404.1504(a) — 1 case
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.