I-1-10-25.Appeals Council Actions When Subsequent Application is Pending or Denied

Last Update: 8/26/13 (Transmittal I-1-67)

A. Denying Request for Review

If the analyst recommends a denial of the request for review, the denial notice will not reference the subsequent application.

If the AC received additional evidence in association with the prior claim, and the evidence does not relate to the period on or before the date of the administrative law judge's (ALJ) decision, the analyst will associate a copy of the information with the subsequent application. The analyst will either scan the evidence into the electronic folder or, when a paper folder is involved, mail the information to the component with jurisdiction.

NOTE 1:

To return additional evidence to a claimant, the analyst will follow the procedures in HALLEX I-3-5-20.

NOTE 2:

If a paper file is involved and the claimant resides in the Fourth, Sixth, or Ninth Circuits, the analyst must be sure to notify the State agency or ALJ when the denial is issued. See instructions in HALLEX I-1-10-40.

B. Remands When Subsequent Application Is Pending or Denied

f the AC grants review and remands to an ALJ for further proceedings, the remand order will usually address the subsequent application.

he analyst will select the appropriate language from the Document Generation System (DGS), as follows:

  • When the subsequent application involves the same title(s) as the request for review, the remand order will state that the AC's remand action renders the subsequent application duplicate and the claim file(s) must be associated.

  • When the subsequent application involves a different title, the AC will instruct the ALJ to consider consolidating the claims. If there is an overlapping period of time between the prior and subsequent claims, the AC can consolidate the claims and direct the ALJ to consider the claims together.

  • When the AC claim is a cessation or termination case and the subsequent application is an initial application, the AC will instruct the ALJ to consider whether to consolidate the subsequent application(s) with the cessation issue.

NOTE:

See HALLEX I-1-10-30 when the subsequent application results in an allowance.

C. Fully Favorable or Partially Favorable Decisions

When the AC issues a fully favorable or partially favorable decision, the decision will address whether the AC's action makes the subsequent application duplicate.

D. Corrective Unfavorable Decisions

When the AC issues a corrective unfavorable decision, the decision usually has no effect on a subsequent application that is pending or denied because the AC generally only adjudicates through the date of the ALJ decision.

The AC generally will not address a subsequent application in an unfavorable decision, unless it seems appropriate to state that the AC's action on the prior claim has no effect on the subsequent application.