20 C.F.R. § 404.977

Case remanded by Appeals Council

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

(a) When the Appeals Council may remand a case. The Appeals Council may remand a case to an administrative law judge so that he or she may hold a hearing and issue a decision or a recommended decision. The Appeals Council may also remand a case in which additional evidence is needed or additional action by the administrative law judge is required.

(b) Action by administrative law judge on remand. The administrative law judge shall take any action that is ordered by the Appeals Council and may take any additional action that is not inconsistent with the Appeals Council's remand order.

(c) Notice when case is returned with a recommended decision. When the administrative law judge sends a case to the Appeals Council with a recommended decision, a notice is mailed to the parties at their last known address. The notice tells them that the case has been sent to the Appeals Council, explains the rules for filing briefs or other written statements with the Appeals Council, and includes a copy of the recommended decision.

(d) Filing briefs with and obtaining evidence from the Appeals Council. (1) You may file briefs or other written statements about the facts and law relevant to your case with the Appeals Council within 20 days of the date that the recommended decision is mailed to you. Any party may ask the Appeals Council for additional time to file briefs or statements. The Appeals Council will extend this period, as appropriate, if you show that you had good cause for missing the deadline.

(2) All other rules for filing briefs with and obtaining evidence from the Appeals Council follow the procedures explained in this subpart.

(e) Procedures before the Appeals Council. (1) The Appeals Council, after receiving a recommended decision, will conduct its proceedings and issue its decision according to the procedures explain in this subpart.

(2) If the Appeals Council believes that more evidence is required, it may again remand the case to an administrative law judge for further inquiry into the issues, rehearing, receipt of evidence, and another decision or recommended decision. However, if the Appeals Council decides that it can get the additional evidence more quickly, it will take appropriate action.

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 201 cases (106 in the last 5 years), 1986–2026 · leading case: Noreja v. Commissioner, SSA

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

Noreja v. Commissioner, SSA (2020) ca10 · cites it 4× “at 955 (citing 20 C.F.R. § 404.977 (b)).”

Johnson v. Commissioner of Social Security (2008) ca3 · cites it 2× “” 20 C.F.R. § 404.977 (b). In remanding Johnson’s case to a third hearing before an ALJ, the Appeals Council noted that “[t]he record contains statements from Dr.”

Luther D. Mullen v. Otis Bowen, Secretary of Health and Human Services, Richard G. Shepherd v. Otis Bowen, Secretary of (1986) ca6 “20 C.F.R. § 404.977 . The Appeals Council also has jurisdiction over a social security claim where a case has been remanded by a federal district court, 20 C.”

Kaddo v. Commissioner of Social Security (2017) mied · cites it 2× “” 20 C.F.R. § 404.977 (b). In Godbey , a district court held that, “[t]his means administrative law judge compliance with a remand order is a mandatory procedural requirement under the Commissioner’s own regulations.”

Dommes v. Colvin (2016) nynd · cites it 3× “” 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.977 (b), 416.1477(b).”

Tauber v. Barnhart (2006) gand · cites it 2× “” 20 C.F.R. § 404.977 (b) (emphasis added).”

Gabriel M. Martinez v. Jo Anne B. Barnhart, Commissioner of Social Security Administration (2006) ca10 “970 (a)(3) (providing that Appeals Council will review a case if “[t]he action, findings or conclusions of the administrative law judge are not supported by substantial evidence”); 20 C.F.R. § 404.977 (a) (providing that Appeals Council may remand a case “in which additional…”

Max CULBERTSON, Appellant, v. Donna E. SHALALA, Secretary of the Department of Health and Human Services, Appellee (1994) ca8 “20 C.F.R. §§ 404.977 (a), 404.979 (1993).”

Algiers MUSE, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Louis W. SULLIVAN, M.D., Secretary of Health and Human Services, Defendant-Appelle (1991) ca5 “20 C.F.R. § 404.977 (1986); see also Houston v.”

Cabibi v. Colvin (2014) nyed “” 20 C.F.R. § 404.977 (b) (emphasis added).”

William F. LITTLEFIELD v. Margaret M. HECKLER, Secretary of Health and Human Services, Appellant (1987) ca3 · cites it 2× “This notice was in the form required by 20 C.F.R. § 404.977 (c). On September 27,1984, the AU issued a “Recommended Decision” concluding that Littlefield’s pain and limitations are credible, that he is unable to return to his past heavy work, that his combination of pain and…”

Ischay v. Barnhart (2005) cacd “” See 20 C.F.R. § 404.977 (b). In this case, the Appeals Council “remand[ed] the case to an [ALJ] for further proceedings consistent with the order of the court.”

Show all 201 citing cases →

— 20 C.F.R. § 404.977(a)(b) — 1 case

King v. Kijakazi (2020) ned

— 20 C.F.R. § 404.977(b) — 1 case

Perry v. Colvin (2016) dcd

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.