20 C.F.R. § 404.976

Procedures before the Appeals Council

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

(a) Limitation of issues. The Appeals Council may limit the issues it considers if it notifies you and the other parties of the issues it will review.

(b) Evidence the Appeals Council will exhibit. The Appeals Council will evaluate all additional evidence it receives, but will only mark as an exhibit and make part of the official record additional evidence that it determines meets the requirements of § 404.970(a)(5) and (b). If we need to file a certified administrative record in Federal court, we will include in that record all additional evidence the Appeals Council received during the administrative review process, including additional evidence that the Appeals Council received but did not exhibit or make part of the official record.

(c) Oral argument. You may request to appear before the Appeals Council to present oral argument in support of your request for review. The Appeals Council will grant your request if it decides that your case raises an important question of law or policy or that oral argument would help to reach a proper decision. If your request to appear is granted, the Appeals Council will tell you the time and place of the oral argument at least 10 business days before the scheduled date. The Appeals Council will determine whether your appearance will be by audio, agency video, online video, or in person as set forth in § 404.936. The Appeals Council will determine whether any other person relevant to the proceeding will appear by audio, agency video, online video, or in person as set forth in § 404.936(c)(2).

[81 FR 90994, Dec. 16, 2016, as amended at 84 FR 69306, Dec. 18, 2019; 85 FR 73157, Nov. 16, 2020; 89 FR 68362, Aug. 26, 2024]

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 64 cases (11 in the last 5 years), 1965–2026 · leading case: Gisbrecht v. Barnhart, 535 U.S. 789 (2002).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

Gisbrecht v. Barnhart, 535 U.S. 789 (2002). · cites it 2× “20 CFR § 404.976 (1961). [3] Title 20 CFR § 404.”

JoAnn Thornton v. Comm'r, Soc. Sec. Admin., 597 F. App'x 604 (11th Cir. 2015). · cites it 2× “20 C.F.R. §§ 404.976 (b)(1), 416.1476(b)(1).”

Rolon v. Comm'r of Soc. Sec., 994 F. Supp. 2d 496 (S.D.N.Y. 2014). “” 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.976 (b)(1), 416.1476(b)(1).”

Coalition for Gov't Procurement v. Fed. Prison Indus., Inc., 365 F.3d 435 (6th Cir. 2004). “2080 (citing 20 C.F.R. § 404.976 (a)). The coexistence of the foregoing factors — the broad investigatory authority vested to the decision-maker, the unilateral nature of the proceedings, and the express informality of the administrative process — led the plurality to conclude…”

Carl Whitney v. Michael J. Astrue, 668 F.3d 1004 (8th Cir. 2012). · cites it 4× “) However he also argued that remand was appropriate under 20 C.F.R. § 404.976 (a)(1), 20 C.F.R. § 404.”

Stieberger v. Heckler, 615 F. Supp. 1315 (S.D.N.Y. 1985). · cites it 2× “20 C.F.R. § 404.976 (b). If the Appeals Council decides that the case raises an important issue of law or policy or that oral argument would be helpful, it may grant a claimant leave to present oral argument.”

Webster v. Colvin, 215 F. Supp. 3d 237 (W.D.N.Y. 2016). “See 20 C.F.R. § 404.976 (b) (“If [the claimant] submit[s] evidence that does not relate to the period on or before the date of the [ALJ’s] hearing decision, the Appeals Council will explain why it did not accept the additional evidence[.”

Evans v. Colvin, 649 F. App'x 35 (2d Cir. 2016). “That is correct, as 20 C.F.R. § 404.976 (b)(1) plainly states that the “Appeals Council will consider .”

Bradshaw v. Berryhill, 372 F. Supp. 3d 349 (E.D.N.C. 2019). “(quoting 20 C.F.R. § 404.976 (a) ). But beyond that, there were other indicia that Social Security proceedings are nonadversarial.”

Patoski v. Berryhill, 320 F. Supp. 3d 283 (D.D.C. 2018). “See 20 C.F.R. § 404.976 (a) ; see also Kennedy v.”

Leola BROWN, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Louis W. SULLIVAN, Sec'y of Dep't of Health & Human Servs., Defendant-Appellee, 916 F.2d 492 (9th Cir. 1990). “” 20 C.F.R. § 404.976 (b) (1989). Here, the Appeals Council made a determination without examining a transcript of the audio cassette which represented the only recording of the AU hearing.”

20 soc.sec.rep.ser. 511, unempl.ins.rep. Cch 17,960 Eddie K. Baker v. Otis R. Bowen, M.D., Sec'y of Health & Human Servs., Elwyn R. Shugart v. Otis Bowen, M.D., Sec'y of Health & Human Servs., David W. Stibbins v. Otis R. Bowen, M.D., Sec'y, Dept. Of Health & Human Servs., Thomas E. MacHen v. Otis R. Bowen, M.D., Sec'y of Health & Human Servs., Mary F. Phillips v. Otis R. Bowen, M.D., Sec'y of Health & Human Servs., 839 F.2d 1075 (5th Cir. 1988). “See 20 C.F.R. 404.976(b) and 404.979; Carry v.”

Show all 64 citing cases →

— 20 C.F.R. § 404.976(b) — 5 cases

Baker v. Bowen, 839 F.2d 1075 (5th Cir. 1988).

Prince v. Colvin, 94 F. Supp. 3d 787 (N.D. Tex. 2015).

Crouch v. Soc. Sec. Admin., Comm'r of (D. Kan. 2023).

Mercado-Santiago v. Comm'r of Soc. Sec. (D.P.R. 2024).

— 20 C.F.R. § 404.976(c) — 1 case

Stieberger v. Heckler, 615 F. Supp. 1315 (S.D.N.Y. 1985). “20 C.F.R. § 404.976 (b). If the Appeals Council decides that the case raises an important issue of law or policy or that oral argument would be helpful, it may grant a claimant leave to present oral argument.”

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.