(a) General rule. When a Federal court remands a case to the Commissioner for further consideration, the Appeals Council, acting on behalf of the Commissioner, may make a decision following the provisions in paragraph (b) or (c) of this section, dismiss the proceedings, except as provided in paragraph (d) of this section, or remand the case to an administrative law judge following the provisions in paragraph (e) of this section with instructions to take action and issue a decision or return the case to the Appeals Council with a recommended decision. Any issues relating to the claim(s) may be considered by the Appeals Council or administrative law judge whether or not they were raised in the administrative proceedings leading to the final decision in the case.
(b) Appeals Council decision without a hearing. If the Appeals Council assumes responsibility under paragraph (a) of this section for issuing a decision without a hearing, it will follow the procedures explained in §§ 416.1473 and 416.1479.
(c) Administrative appeals judge decision after holding a hearing. If the Appeals Council assumes responsibility for issuing a decision and a hearing is necessary to complete adjudication of the claim(s), an administrative appeals judge will hold a hearing using the procedures set forth in §§ 416.1429 through 416.1461, as applicable.
(d) Appeals Council dismissal. After a Federal court remands a case to the Commissioner for further consideration, the Appeals Council may dismiss the proceedings before it for any reason that an administrative law judge may dismiss a request for a hearing under § 416.1457. The Appeals Council will not dismiss the proceedings in a claim 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.
(e) Appeals Council remand. If the Appeals Council remands a case under paragraph (a) of this section, it will follow the procedures explained in § 416.1477.
[85 FR 73160, Nov. 16, 2020]
Notes of Decisions
Aikens v. Shalala, 956 F. Supp. 14 (D.D.C. 1997).
“” See 20 C.F.R. § 416.1483 . 16 . In addition, the Secretary concedes this point.”
Billy R. Scott v. Otis R. Bowen, Sec'y of Health & Human Servs., 808 F.2d 1428 (11th Cir. 1987).
· cites it 2× “The case was remanded to the Appeals Council and on November, 30, 1983, the Appeals Council in turn issued an order remanding the case to an ALJ, with instructions to hold a de novo hearing and to issue a recommended decision, pursuant to 20 C.F.R. § 416.1483 (1986). The order…”
Wiltz v. Comm'r of Soc. Sec. Admin., 412 F. Supp. 2d 601 (E.D. Tex. 2005).
“Absent law-of-the-case implications, regulations permit consideration of all issues relating to the claim when a federal court remands a case to the Commissioner, and in turn the Appeals Council remands the case for rehearing by an ALJ: “Any issues relating to your claim may he…”
Collier v. Barnhart, 77 F. App'x 991 (9th Cir. 2003).
“Collier’s remaining contention based on 20 C.F.R. § 416.1483 is unavailing because the district court specifically remanded the case to develop what was at best, an inconclusive record.”
Rael v. Soc. Sec. Admin. (D.N.M. 2024).
· cites it 2× “See 20 C.F.R. § 416.1483 (a). If the claimant does not file exceptions and the Appeals Council does not assume jurisdiction of the case, the ALJ’s decision becomes final 61 days after it is issued.”
Frost v. Comm'r of Soc. Sec. (W.D. Wash. 2025).
· cites it 2× “See 20 C.F.R. § 416.1483 (a) 5 (“When a Federal court remands a case to the Commissioner .”
Williams v. Saul (S.D. Ala. 2020).
“” 20 C.F.R. § 416.1483 . When the Appeals Council remands a case to an ALJ, the ALJ must “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.”
Smith v. Kijakazi (D. Maryland 2022).
“there were “jobs that exist in significant numbers in the national economy that the claimant [could] perform.”
Hewitt v. Soc. Sec. Admin. Comm'r (D. Me. 2020).
“Although Defendant’s regulations provide that when a federal court remands a case to the commissioner for further consideration, “[a]ny issues relating to [the] claim may be considered by the administrative law judge whether or not they were raised in the 'administrative…”
Lambert v. Soc. Sec. Admin. (N.D. Okla. 2023).
“3 2 See generally 20 C.F.R. § 416.1483 for Title XVI. (Where possible, the body of this opinion will reference the Title II regulations and provide, the first time mentioned, a parallel citation for Title XVI.”
— 20 C.F.R. § 416.1483(a) — 1 case
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.