20 C.F.R. § 416.1477

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 explained 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 35 cases (23 in the last 5 years), 1987–2025 · leading case: Patsy Gibbs v. Jo Anne B. Barnhart

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

Patsy Gibbs v. Jo Anne B. Barnhart (2005) ca11 · cites it 2× “665 (b); see also 20 C.F.R. § 416.1477 (b) (noting that an ALJ “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”).”

Gonzales v. Colvin (2016) cod “Gonzales has directed this Court’s attention to 20 C.F.R. § 416.1477 (b), which commands that the ALJ “shall take any action that is ordered by the Appeals Council.”

Hernandez-Devereaux v. Astrue (2009) ord “As set forth in 20 CFR § 416.1477 , on remand the ALJ “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.”

Kress v. Barnhart (2004) nywd “983; 20 C.F.R. §§ 416.1477 , 416.1483. The Assistant United States Attorney assigned to this case is directed to take possession of these documents (which were sent by plaintiff and received by this Court on April 24, 2003 and May 29, 2003, respectively) and transmit them to the…”

Roberson v. Barnhart (2003) mdd “See 20 C.F.R. §§ 416.1477 , 416.1479. Plaintiffs complaint is premature because the Commissioner has not issued a final decision.”

Casanova v. Saul (2020) ctd · cites it 2× “20 C.F.R. § 416.1477 (b) (“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.”

Sheehan v. Sullivan (1990) mnd · cites it 5× “In either case, a remand to the ALJ is subject to the procedures set forth in 20 C.F.R. § 416.1477 . The ALJ may take no action that is not consistent with the Appeals Council remand order.”

John E. Peet v. Nancy A. Berryhill (2017) ca8 “As to those claims that arguably relate to the appealed decision, this court concludes that (1) the administrative law judge (ALJ) properly limited his consideration to the period within the scope of a remand order of the Appeals Council, see 20 C.F.R. § 416.1477 (upon…”

Woodley v. Social Security Administration, Commissioner (2020) alnd “1470 , and, under the authority of 20 C.F.R. § 416.1477 , the Appeals Council vacated the ALJ’s decision and remanded the case back to the ALJ for resolution of several issues.”

Olivas v. Commissioner of Social Security Administration (2023) azd “977 (b); 20 C.F.R. § 416.1477 (b). 15 As the Court noted above, on remand from the district court, the Appeals Council 16 specifically instructed the ALJ to “[f]urther evaluate the claimant’s alleged symptoms and 17 provide rationale in accordance with the disability regulations…”

Garcia Caraballo v. Saul (2022) ctd “The ALJ Complied with the Appeals Council’s Directives An ALJ’s failure to comply with remand instructions of the Appeals Council is legal error, see 20 C.F.R. § 416.1477 (b) (“The administrative law judge shall take any action that is ordered by the Appeals Council and may take…”

Page v. Commissioner of Social Security (2022) flmd “” 20 C.F.R. § 416.1477 (b). “[C]ourts in this Circuit have held that an ALJ’s failure to take specific action mandated by the Appeals Council on remand is reversible error because it obviates an ALJ’s duty to fully and fairly develop the record.”

Show all 35 citing cases →

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.