An administrative law judge may dismiss a request for a hearing under any of the following conditions:
(a) At any time before notice of the hearing decision is mailed, you or the party or parties that requested the hearing ask to withdraw the request. This request may be submitted in writing to the administrative law judge or made orally at the hearing.
(b)(1)(i) Neither you nor the person you designate to act as your representative appears at the time and place set for the hearing and you have been notified before the time set for the hearing that your request for hearing may be dismissed without further notice if you did not appear at the time and place of hearing, and good cause has not been found by the administrative law judge for your failure to appear; or
(ii) Neither you nor the person you designate to act as your representative appears at the time and place set for the hearing and within 10 days after the administrative law judge mails you a notice asking why you did not appear, you do not give a good reason for the failure to appear.
(2) In determining good cause or good reason under this paragraph, we will consider any physical, mental, educational, or linguistic limitations (including any lack of facility with the English language) which you may have.
(c) The administrative law judge decides that there is cause to dismiss a hearing request entirely or to refuse to consider any one or more of the issues because—
(1) The doctrine of res judicata applies in that we have made a previous determination or decision under this subpart about your rights on the same facts and on the same issue or issues, and this previous determination or decision has become final by either administrative or judicial action;
(2) The person requesting a hearing has no right to it under § 404.930;
(3) You did not request a hearing within the stated time period and we have not extended the time for requesting a hearing under § 404.933(c); or
(4) You die, there are no other parties, and we have no information to show that another person may be adversely affected by the determination that was to be reviewed at the hearing. However, dismissal of the hearing request will be vacated if, within 60 days after the date of the dismissal, another person submits a written request for a hearing on the claim and shows that he or she may be adversely affected by the determination that was to be reviewed at the hearing.
[45 FR 52081, Aug. 5, 1980, as amended at 50 FR 21438, May 24, 1985; 51 FR 303, Jan. 3, 1986; 59 FR 1634, Jan. 12, 1994]
Notes of Decisions
Cited in
347
cases (
65 in the last 5 years), 1963–2026 · leading case:
Califano v. Sanders, 430 U.S. 99 (1977).
Califano v. Sanders, 430 U.S. 99 (1977).
· cites it 2× “20 CFR §§ 404.957 (a), (b), 404.958 (1976).”
Eunice Subia v. Comm'r of Soc. Sec., 264 F.3d 899 (9th Cir. 2001).
· cites it 5× “In McNatt , we analyzed 20 C.F.R. § 404.957 , which states that an ALJ may dismiss a request for a hearing if neither the claimant nor the claimant’s representative “appears” at the scheduled hearing.”
Carr v. Saul, 593 U.S. 83 (2021).
“Compare 20 CFR §404.957 with §404.967. Most claimants thus submit no more than a one-page re- quest for review to the Appeals Council before having their request denied.”
Gertie Wilson v. Joseph A. Califano, Sec'y, H.E.W., 580 F.2d 208 (6th Cir. 1978).
· cites it 5× “However, the court considered claimant’s second application- in light of 20 C.F.R. § 404.957 (a) which pro *212 vides that an initial determination may be reopened within twelve months from the date of the notice of the initial determination.”
Richard McNatt v. Kenneth S. Apfel, Comm'r, Soc. Sec. Admin., 201 F.3d 1084 (9th Cir. 2000).
· cites it 2× “Dismissal of a request for a hearing before an administrative law judge is governed by 20 C.F.R. § 404.957 , which provides in relevant part: *1088 An administrative law judge may dismiss a request for a hearing under any of the following conditions: (b)(1)® Neither you nor the…”
Evelyn Plummer v. Kenneth S. Apfel, Comm'r of Soc. Sec., 186 F.3d 422 (3rd Cir. 1999).
“Because an ALJ is authorized to dismiss entirely or in part a hearing request if he or she decides that the Social Security Administration reached a final decision on one or more of the issues raised by the applicant, see 20 C.F.R. § 404.957 (1998), a federal court might not…”
Heather M. v. Berryhill, 384 F. Supp. 3d 928 (E.D. Ill. 2019).
· cites it 2× “2007) ("The doctrine of res judicata is explicitly incorporated into administrative proceedings within the Social Security Administration by 20 C.F.R. § 404.957 (c)(1)."). If this is the most egregious error plaintiff can identify, her claim is in trouble.”
— 20 C.F.R. § 404.957(a) — 6 cases
— 20 C.F.R. § 404.957(b) — 4 cases
Gertie Wilson v. Joseph A. Califano, Sec'y, H.E.W., 580 F.2d 208 (6th Cir. 1978).
“However, the court considered claimant’s second application- in light of 20 C.F.R. § 404.957 (a) which pro *212 vides that an initial determination may be reopened within twelve months from the date of the notice of the initial determination.”
— 20 C.F.R. § 404.957(b)(1)(i) — 1 case
— 20 C.F.R. § 404.957(b)(2) — 7 cases
— 20 C.F.R. § 404.957(b)(i) — 1 case
— 20 C.F.R. § 404.957(c) — 2 cases
— 20 C.F.R. § 404.957(c)(1) — 9 cases
— 20 C.F.R. § 404.957(c)(2) — 1 case
— 20 C.F.R. § 404.957(c)(6) — 1 case
— 20 C.F.R. § 404.957(c)(l) — 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.