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. § 404.987

Reopening and revising determinations and decisions

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

(a) General. Generally, if you are dissatisfied with a determination or decision made in the administrative review process, but do not request further review within the stated time period, you lose your right to further review and that determination or decision becomes final. However, a determination or a decision made in your case which is otherwise final and binding may be reopened and revised by us.

(b) Procedure for reopening and revision. We may reopen a final determination or decision on our own initiative, or you may ask that a final determination or a decision to which you were a party be reopened. In either instance, if we reopen the determination or decision, we may revise that determination or decision. The conditions under which we may reopen a previous determination or decision, either on our own initiative or at your request, are explained in § 404.988.

[59 FR 8535, Feb. 23, 1994]
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 102 cases (21 in the last 5 years), 1981–2025 · leading case: Willie Ousley v. Comm'r of Soc. Sec.
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Willie Ousley v. Comm'r of Soc. Sec. (2018) ca6 · cites it 2× “are distinct from reopenings as described in 20 CFR 404.987–404.996 and 20 CFR 416.1487–416.”
Olivia Kneeland v. Nancy Berryhill, Acting Cmsnr (2017) ca5 “See 20 C.F.R. § 404.987 (a) ("[A] determination or a decision made in your case which is otherwise final and binding may be reopened and revised by us.”
Ronald M. TYRA, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. SECRETARY OF HEALTH & HUMAN SERVICES, Defendant-Appellee (1990) ca6 · cites it 2× “Kloc’s letter to the Secretary prompted the Appeals Council to reopen claimant’s action and vacate the first AU’s findings pursuant to 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.987 , 404.988, 404.989 (1989).”
John S. Young v. Secretary of Health and Human Services (1992) ca7 “Therefore, we vacate and remand for further analysis and explanation of the evidence relating to his mental impairments and to the skills and duties entailed in his former jobs as well as the other matters addressed in this opinion. •VACATED AND REMANDED. 1 . Mr.”
Charles Mitchael v. Carolyn W. Colvin (2016) ca8 “987 (b), the agency “may reopen a final determination or decision on [its] own initiative, or [the petitioner] may ask that a final determination or a decision to which [the petitioner was] a party be reopened.”
Carter v. Colvin (2016) kyed “The interpretation is expressed in Social Security Ruling 16-lp, which makes clear that “[Qraud and similar fault redeterminations under sections 205(u) and 1631(e)(7) of the Act are distinct from reopenings as described in 20 CFR 404.987 — 404.996 and 20 CFR 416.1487 — 416.”
Baxter v. Schweiker (1982) gand · cites it 4× “” More particularly, this record presents the issue of how courts should treat a claimant who receives an adverse ruling on a claim, but fails either to exhaust his administrative remedies and seek court review, or to petition to reopen his case pursuant to 20 C.F.R. § 404.987…”
Joseph D. BUTTERWORTH, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Otis R. BOWEN, Secretary of Health and Human Services, Defendant-Appellant (1986) ca11 · cites it 3× “The Appeals Council, relying on 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.987 and 404.988(a) had sua sponte reopened and revised the administrative law judge’s (ALJ) decision that claimant Joseph Butterworth was disabled.”
Mildred R. TAYLOR, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Margaret M. HECKLER, Secretary of Health and Human Services, Defendant-Appell (1985) ca9 “1982); 20 C.F.R. § 404.987 (a). Discretionary decisions are not “final decisions” within the meaning of section 450(g).”
Ferriell v. Commissioner of Social Security (2010) ca6 · cites it 2× “, 20 C.F.R. § 404.987 (“[A] determination or decision made in your case which is otherwise final and binding may be reopened and revised by us.”
April Fiske v. Michael Astrue (2012) ca4 “The Commissioner may elect to reopen a prior decision, 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.987 , 988 (2011), but this decision is not reviewable.”
Charles PURTER, Appellant, v. Margaret HECKLER, Secretary Dept. of Health and Human Services (1985) ca3 “See 20 C.F.R. § 404.987 (b) (1984) (claimant may ask that a determination or a decision to which he was a party be revised).”
Show all 102 citing cases →
— 20 C.F.R. § 404.987(a) — 2 cases
Lloyd A. Gentry v. Donna E. Shalala, Secretary of Health & Human Services (1995) ca10
Doan v. Secretary of Health & Human Services (1987) ohsd
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.