20 C.F.R. § 404.984

Appeals Council review of hearing decision in a case remanded by a Federal court

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

(a) General. In accordance with § 404.983, when a case is remanded by a Federal court for further consideration and the Appeals Council remands the case to an administrative law judge, or an administrative appeals judge issues a decision pursuant to § 404.983(c), the decision of the administrative law judge or administrative appeals judge will become the final decision of the Commissioner after remand on your case unless the Appeals Council assumes jurisdiction of the case. The Appeals Council may assume jurisdiction, using the standard set forth in § 404.970, based on written exceptions to the decision which you file with the Appeals Council or based on its authority pursuant to paragraph (c) of this section. If the Appeals Council assumes jurisdiction of the case, it will not dismiss the request for a hearing where we are otherwise required by law or a judicial order to file the Commissioner's additional and modified findings of fact and decision with a court.

(b) You file exceptions disagreeing with the hearing decision. (1) If you disagree with the hearing decision, in whole or in part, you may file exceptions to the decision with the Appeals Council. Exceptions may be filed by submitting a written statement to the Appeals Council setting forth your reasons for disagreeing with the decision of the administrative law judge or administrative appeals judge. The exceptions must be filed within 30 days of the date you receive the hearing decision or an extension of time in which to submit exceptions must be requested in writing within the 30-day period. A timely request for a 30-day extension will be granted by the Appeals Council. A request for an extension of more than 30 days should include a statement of reasons as to why you need the additional time.

(2) If written exceptions are timely filed, the Appeals Council will consider your reasons for disagreeing with the hearing decision and all the issues presented by your case. If the Appeals Council concludes that there is no reason to change the hearing decision, it will issue a notice to you addressing your exceptions and explaining why no change in the hearing decision is warranted. In this instance, the hearing decision is the final decision of the Commissioner after remand.

(3) When you file written exceptions to the hearing decision, the Appeals Council may assume jurisdiction at any time, even after the 60-day time period which applies when you do not file exceptions. If the Appeals Council assumes jurisdiction of your case, any issues relating to your claim may be considered by the Appeals Council whether or not they were raised in the administrative proceedings leading to the final decision in your case or subsequently considered by the administrative law judge or administrative appeals judge in the administrative proceedings following the court's remand order. The Appeals Council will either make a new, independent decision pursuant to § 404.983(b) or § 404.983(c), based on a preponderance of the evidence in the record that will be the final decision of the Commissioner after remand, dismiss the request for a hearing, or remand the case to an administrative law judge for further proceedings, including a new decision.

(c) Appeals Council assumes jurisdiction without exceptions being filed. Any time within 60 days after the date of the hearing decision, the Appeals Council may decide to assume jurisdiction of your case even though no written exceptions have been filed. Notice of this action will be mailed to all parties at their last known address. You will be provided with the opportunity to file briefs or other written statements with the Appeals Council about the facts and law relevant to your case. After the Appeals Council receives the briefs or other written statements, or the time allowed (usually 30 days) for submitting them has expired, the Appeals Council will either make a new, independent decision pursuant to § 404.983(b) or § 404.983(c), based on a preponderance of the evidence in the record that will be the final decision of the Commissioner after remand, dismiss the request for a hearing, or remand the case to an administrative law judge for further proceedings, including a new decision.

(d) Exceptions are not filed and the Appeals Council does not otherwise assume jurisdiction. If no exceptions are filed and the Appeals Council does not assume jurisdiction of your case, the decision of the administrative law judge or administrative appeals judge becomes the final decision of the Commissioner after remand.

[85 FR 73185, Nov. 16, 2020]
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 521 cases (328 in the last 5 years), 1991–2026 · leading case: Walker-Butler v. Berryhill
Walker-Butler v. Berryhill (2017) ca1 · cites it 8× “20 C.F.R. § 404.984 . Plaintiff thereafter filed a civil action in federal district court on January 4, 2016, challenging the ALJ’s decision on remand.”
Lax v. Astrue (2007) ca10 “20 C.F.R. §§ 404.984 , 416.1484 (2006) (when federal court remands case for further consideration, decision of ALJ becomes final decision of Commissioner unless Appeals Council assumes jurisdiction of case); Hamlin v.”
Olivia Kneeland v. Nancy Berryhill, Acting Cmsnr (2017) ca5 “32 And 20 C.F.R. § 404.984 (b)(3) suggests the same: If the Appeals- Council assumes jurisdiction, it will make a new, independent decision based on the preponderance of the evidence in the entire record affirming, modifying, or reversing the decision of the administrative law…”
Petty v. Astrue (2008) azd · cites it 3× “” 20 C.F.R. § 404.984 (a). The Appeals Council may assume jurisdiction if the claimant files exceptions disagreeing with the decision of the ALJ or on its own motion.”
Todd Hess v. Martin J. O'Malley (2024) ca7 “See 20 C.F.R. § 404.984 (d). Mr. Hess again sought review in the district court.”
Alice Frame v. Commissioner, Social Security Administration (2015) ca11 “See 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.984 , 416.1484. Once more, Frame sought judicial review of the denial of her benefits application.”
Keeley Hamilton v. Comm'r of Soc. Sec. (2024) ca6 · cites it 2× “See 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.984 , 416.1484. The ALJ’s opinion thus became the Administration’s final decision after the 60-day period expired.”
O'Connor v. Berryhill (2019) wawd “See 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.984 (d), 416.1484(d). DISCUSSION This Court may set aside the Commissioner's denial of Social Security benefits only if the ALJ's decision is based on legal error or not supported by substantial evidence in the record as a whole.”
Hale v. Comm'r of Soc. Sec. (2017) ohsd · cites it 2× “See 20 C.F.R. § 404.984 (d) (in a case remanded by a Federal Court, "[i]f no exceptions are filed and the Appeals Council does not assume jurisdiction of [the] case, the decision of the [ALJ] becomes the final decision of the Commissioner after remand").”
Rush v. Saul (2019) nmd “The ALJ's decision is the Commissioner's final decision for purposes of judicial review pursuant to 20 C.F.R. § 404.984 (a). The Court reserves discussion of the medical records relevant to this appeal for its analysis.”
Ischay v. Barnhart (2005) cacd “See 20 C.F.R. § 404.984 (a). Plaintiff then filed suit in this Court for a third time.”
Gusky v. Astrue (2013) nywd · cites it 3× “20 C.F.R. § 404.984 (a) (“§ 404.984(a)”) provides [i]f the Appeals Council assumes jurisdiction of [the] case, any issues relating to [the] claim may be considered by the Appeals Council whether or not they *190 were raised in the administrative proceedings leading up to the…”
— 20 C.F.R. § 404.984(a) — 3 cases
Barton v. Kijakazi (2022) cand
Stewart v. Kijakazi (2023) cand
Kramer v. Saul (2022) pamd
— 20 C.F.R. § 404.984(b)(2) — 3 cases
Floyd v. Saul (2021) nced
Miller v. Kijakazi (2023) utd
— 20 C.F.R. § 404.984(d) — 10 cases
Wallace v. Saul (2021) ctd
Freundlich v. Saul (2021) ctd
Freundlich v. Saul (2021) ctd
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.