C.F.R. » Title 20 » CHAPTER III—SOCIAL SECURITY ADMINISTRATION › PART 416—SUPPLEMENTAL SECURITY INCOME FOR THE AGED, BLIND, AND DISABLED › Subpart N—Determinations, Administrative Review Process, and Reopening of Determinations and Decisions

20 C.F.R. § 416.1481

Effect of Appeals Council's decision or denial of review

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

The Appeals Council may deny a party's request for review or it may decide to review a case and make a decision. The Appeals Council's decision, or the decision of the administrative law judge if the request for review is denied, is binding unless you or another party file an action in Federal district court, or the decision is revised. You may file an action in a Federal district court within 60 days after the date you receive notice of the Appeals Council's action.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 612 cases (412 in the last 5 years), 1982–2026 · leading case: Mills v. Social Security
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Mills v. Social Security (2001) ca1 · cites it 2× “20 C.F.R. § 416.1481 . The denial was signed by an administrative appeals judge who, on March 24, 1999, wrote Mills’ lawyer a separate letter discussing the Garnett and Joy reports.”
Tina Popa v. Nancy Berryhill (2017) ca9 “§ 405 (h); 20 C.F.R. § 416.1481 . Popa filed a complaint seeking judicial review of the Commissioner’s final decision on December 11, 2014.”
Terry Steele v. Jo Anne B. Barnhart, Commissioner of Social Security (2002) ca7 “20 C.F.R. § 416.1481 . We will uphold the Commissioner’s decision if it is supported by substantial evidence and is free of legal error.”
Jimmie L. Howard v. Commissioner of Social Security (2002) ca6 “20 C.F.R. § 416.1481 . Howard sought review of the Commissioner’s final decision in district court pursuant to 42 U.”
Jelinek v. Astrue (2011) ca7 “See 20 C.F.R. § 416.1481 ; Steele v. Barnhart, 290 F.”
Vallejo v. Berryhill (2017) ca10 “See 20 C.F.R. § 416.1481 . Vallejo then sought judicial review of the Commissioner’s final decision.”
Alyson Luukkonen v. Comm'r of Social Security (2016) ca6 “See 20 C.F.R, § 416.1481. On October 10, 2013, Plaintiff filed a complaint in federal district court seeking review of the SSA’s denial of her claim for SSI.”
James MATLOCK, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Louis W. SULLIVAN, Etc., Defendant-Appellee (1990) ca9 · cites it 2× “20 C.F.R. § 416.1481 (1989) 2 ; see Harper, 813 F.”
Menkes v. Comm Social Security (2008) ca3 “See 20 C.F.R. § 416.1481 . Menkes, represented by counsel, filed a civil action in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania, seeking judicial review of the Commissioner’s final decision.”
Ralph DAMATO, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Louis W. SULLIVAN, M.D., Secretary of Health and Human Services, Defendant-Appelle (1992) ca7 “1467 , the rationale for requiring articulation of its reasoning is absent, since the denial is not subject to judicial review — if the Appeals Council denies a request for review, the AU’s decision becomes the final decision of the Secretary, see 20 C.F.R. § 416.1481 , and…”
Kenneth Cooper v. Commissioner Social Security (2014) ca3 “20 C.F.R. § 416.1481 . Cooper then filed the present case in the Eastern District of Pennsylvania, seeking review of the ALJ’s last decision in light of our remand instructions.”
King v. Colvin (2015) mad “See 20 C.F.R. § 416.1481 . On February 6, 2014, Ms.”
Show all 612 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.