C.F.R. » Title 20 » CHAPTER III—SOCIAL SECURITY ADMINISTRATION › PART 404—FEDERAL OLD-AGE, SURVIVORS AND DISABILITY INSURANCE (1950- ) › Subpart J—Determinations, Administrative Review Process, and Reopening of Determinations and Decisions

20 C.F.R. § 404.955

The effect of a hearing decision

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

The decision of the administrative law judge is binding on all parties to the hearing unless—

(a) You or another party request a review of the decision by the Appeals Council within the stated time period, and the Appeals Council reviews your case;

(b) You or another party requests a review of the decision by the Appeals Council within the stated time period, the Appeals Council denies your request for review, and you seek judicial review of your case by filing an action in a Federal district court;

(c) The Appeals Council decides on its own motion to review the decision under the procedures in § 404.969;

(d) The decision is revised by an administrative law judge or the Appeals Council under the procedures explained in § 404.987;

(e) The expedited appeals process is used;

(f) The decision is a recommended decision directed to the Appeals Council; or

(g) In a case remanded by a Federal court, the Appeals Council assumes jurisdiction under the procedures in § 404.984.

[45 FR 52081, Aug. 5, 1980, as amended at 51 FR 303, Jan. 3, 1986; 54 FR 37792, Sept. 13, 1989; 85 FR 73157, Nov. 16, 2020]
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 570 cases (340 in the last 5 years), 1962–2026 · leading case: Ingram v. Comm'r of Soc. Sec. Admin., 496 F.3d 1253 (11th Cir. 2007).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Ingram v. Comm'r of Soc. Sec. Admin., 496 F.3d 1253 (11th Cir. 2007). · cites it 3× “5,1980) (codified at 20 C.F.R. § 404.955 ), effectively overturned the precedents of this Circuit, but we again disagree.”
Mike Butler v. Kilolo Kijakazi, 4 F.4th 498 (7th Cir. 2021). “2010); 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.955 , 404.981. Butler now challenges the ALJ’s de- termination that he was capable of doing light work with some restrictions, and that a sufficient number of such jobs existed that he could perform.”
Josie CASEY, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Sec'y OF HEALTH & HUMAN Servs., Defendant-Appellee, 987 F.2d 1230 (6th Cir. 1993). · cites it 2× “20 C.F.R. § 404.955 . Given these earlier decisions, plaintiff may not be found disabled prior to September 6, 1986, as that issue has been decided and must be given res judicata effect.”
Melissa Varga v. Carolyn Colvin, 794 F.3d 809 (7th Cir. 2015). “See 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.955 , 404.981. In October 2012, Varga filed a civil action for judicial review of the Commissioner’s final decision.”
Brewes v. Comm'r of Soc. Sec. Admin., 682 F.3d 1157 (9th Cir. 2012). “See 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.955 , 404.981; see also Bass v.”
Tyrone White v. Kilolo Kijakazi, 44 F.4th 828 (9th Cir. 2022). “See 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.955 , 404.981; see also Bass v.”
Luther D. Mullen v. Otis Bowen, Sec'y of Health & Human Servs., Richard G. Shepherd v. Otis Bowen, Sec'y of Health & Human Servs., 800 F.2d 535 (6th Cir. 1986). “, 20 C.F.R. § 404.955 (circumstances in which the administrative law judge’s decision is final).”
Ramona PEREZ, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Shirley S. CHATER, Comm'r of Soc. Sec. Admin., Defendant-Appellee, 77 F.3d 41 (2d Cir. 1996). “See 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.955 , 416.1481. Therefore, when the Appeals Council denies review after considering new evidence, the Secretary’s final decision “necessarily includes the Appeals Council’s conclusion that the ALJ’s findings remained correct despite the new evidence.”
Danny KEETON, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Dep't OF HEALTH & HUMAN Servs., Defendant-Appellee, 21 F.3d 1064 (11th Cir. 1994). “20 C.F.R. § 404.955 . In this situation, the question raised is what constitutes the record when the Appeals Council denies review.”
Minger v. Berryhill, 307 F. Supp. 3d 865 (E.D. Ill. 2018). “See 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.955 ; 404.981. Ms. Minger filed suit under 42 USC § 405 (g), and the parties have consented to the jurisdiction of a Magistrate Judge pursuant to 28 U.”
Hollins v. Massanari, 49 F. App'x 533 (6th Cir. 2002). · cites it 3× “The district court disagreed, *535 noting that under 20 C.F.R. § 404.955 , the prior decision of the ALJ was no longer binding because Hollins had sought judicial review.”
Brenda L. v. Saul, 392 F. Supp. 3d 858 (E.D. Ill. 2019). “See 20 C.F.R. § 404.955 ; 404.981. Plaintiff filed suit under 42 U.”
Show all 570 citing cases →
— 20 C.F.R. § 404.955(b) — 1 case
Wagner v. Apfel, Comm'r (4th Cir. 1999).
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.