Notice Of Appeal To Appeals Council,
Office of Hearings and Appeals
5107 Leesburg Pike
Falls Church, VA 22041-3255
Christopher A. Walters
Social Security Claim 261-90-6357
c/o Dr. Robert Canon
7335 Ritchie Drive
Austin, TX 78724
This is an Appeal from a "Notice of Decision-Partially Favorable" rendered by Williams S Herbert
dated April 20, 2006 at the Office of Hearings and Appeals in San Antonio, Texas. Although Chris
Walters is a resident of the State of Oregon and not a resident of the State of Texas a Dr.
Robert Canon a Professor at the University of Texas School of Social Work has agreed to hold
Chris Walters mail and messages as an assistance to the parties. Judge William Herbert indicated
in his ruling that I have a right to appeal his decision in writing.
Should Appeals Council Review Judge Herbert's
Failure to Complete the Record?
The Appeals Council Order of 12-14-2005 instructed the Office of Hearings and Appeals at San Antonio, Texas
to complete the record. While Judge Herbert Decision does cite the Social Security case history it neglects
to mention or cite various civil actions which include Walters v.Crownover Miller SA-97-CA-1313USDC, WDT 1997;
Walters v Apfel A99CA156SS USDC WDT, 1999;
Bradshaw V. Odom and Walters 04 CVS 2674 in Forsyth County Superior
Court, NC. Perhaps most importantly the Orders and Findings of the 5th US Circuit Court of Appeals Of May 10th,
2004 which permitted extraordinary review by Committees of Congress and the United Nations High Commission on
Human Rights. The vague statement of threats to various public officials are probably sanctions imposed on
the Social Security Administration and it's representatives authorized by Federal Courts of Appeals;
Committees of Congress; and United Nations law. The statments made by your North Carolina representatives in
Bradshaw V. Odom and Walters 04 CVS 2674 in Forsyth County Superior Court, NC that they can violate any law
they wish whenever they want instead of complying with CFR Title 20 Section 416... was in fact the basis of
recent intervention of the US Senate Committee on Aging in December, 2005.
Judge Herbert refers to Chris Walters counsel of record as "The claimant did not appear for the scheduled
hearing and the Administration law Judge finds that the claimant was considered a non-essential witness”
and proceeded with the scheduled hearing." Judge Herbert ignored evidence that Chris Walters is a legal
resident of Portland, Oregon and the medical evidence resides in Washington State and held a hearing in a
state Chris Walters does not reside in. Do the flaws in Judge Herbert's Decision stem from failing to permit
Chris Walters as Appellant Counsel of Record to introduce evidence into the record; to examine evidence and
cross examine his expert witness Dr. Susan Piezer. Judge Herbert makes no mention of the obstruction of
the Appeals Council ORDER of 12-14-2005 which was obstructed in Texas to compel Chris Walters to discontinue
a disability claim in Washington State to travel 2,000 miles in person to receive your ORDER. As with previous
obstruction of Court ORDERS the obstruction of your ORDER of April 14, 2005 is a highly prosecutable crime.
Since Judge Herbert considers Chris Walters an unwanted tourist at the hearings can we easily discern the
Judge's errors? The completion of the record pursuant to Title 42 Section 423(d)(5)(b) Disability
Determinations or the Hallex and Code of Federal Regulation Title 20 Section 416 requires an intelligent
and concise discussion of Chris Walters medical records. For instance the decision should include a brief
and clear review of major medical experts of which there are 160 doctors medical work on colon problems;
congestive heart failure; chronic infections; and circulation problems in the legs. Judge Herbert mumbles
a few words about "chronic colon infections" doesn't even mention the findings of the 3 consultative exams
preformed by Washington State DSHS representatives Dr. Eric Strandberg; Dr. Pinon; and Dr. Shaun Harper.
Judge Herbert's expert Dr. Susan Peizer refers to Chris Walters setting up extensive websites and complex
paper work falls short of the facts that the Social Security Administration asked Chris Walters in 2001 to
under take "vocational training" which in the case at bar involves computer training. One of Chris Walters
earlier resumes on CD-ROM is apparently cited and fails to mention the computer or vocational training being
supervised by Dr. Robert Canon a PHD at University of Texas School of Social Work whose PHD is in psychology
and social work.
Notice Of Appeal To Appeals Council,
Office of Hearings and Appeals
5107 Leesburg Pike
Falls Church, VA 22041-3255
Proposal For Settlement & Agreement
Filed With Social Security Council April, 2006
Question of Incompetence Of Fraud By
Expert Witness Dr. Susan Pelzer PHD
1. Title 42 § 416.1013 Disability determinations the State makes required Dr. Pizer and Judge Herbert to
review and consider the findings of the 3 consultative exams provided by Washington State DSHS Dr.
Strandberg, Dr. Pinon, and Dr. Shawn Harper.
2. The 3 consultative exams done by the Social Security Administrations
representative Washington State DSHS on 10-25-2005 includes detailed instructions
for diagnosis and possible treatment as cited by Dr. Eric Strandberg the Social
Security Administrations representative. The Case Worker Sharon Langs in the
exhibits instructs Dr. Strandberg "Please perform test to establish a diagnosis-including xrays".
While Dr. Strandberg readily established a disability will exist for at least 12 months he declined
to perform the medical test Washington State authorized to be completed.
3. Dr. Pizer PHD dispatched 160 doctors treating medical conditions including
congestive heart failure; 80 doctors treating infections; and 45 doctors treating
chronic colon problem with a statement that doctors can't address the issues because
Chris Walters exaggerates the conditions.
4. In fact it is extremely profitable for doctors and medical authorities to facilitate the
fraud, hoax, and scram by demanding additional disability statements which abuse the taxpayer and
demand medical examinations which no one has any intention of preforming.
5. The United States Supreme Court ruled in Schindler Schiavo V Michael Schiavo that patients
have an absolute right to accept or decline medical treatment and choose their own doctors which
your agency lacks the standing to challenge.
6. How well has Dr. Piezer presented her medical claim to Chris Walters the person who decides what
treatment is or is not appropriate?
7. Title 20 § 416.920a Evaluation of mental impairments.(b) Use of the technique. (1) Under the
special technique, we must first evaluate your pertinent symptoms, signs, and laboratory findings to
determine whether you have a medically determinable mental impairment(s). See §416.908 for more information
about what is needed to show a medically determinable impairment. If we determine that you have a medically
determinable mental impairment(s), we must specify the symptoms, signs, and laboratory findings that
substantiate the presence of the impairment(s) and document our findings in accordance with paragraph (e)
of this section.
8. Does Dr. Piezer present an exact and particular list of mental institutions where Chris
Walters was incarcerated for the type of behavior alleged over a period of years; including the
name of treating physicians and medications most effective in treatment of these problems?
9. Does Dr. Piezer have a list of witnesses who can come forth and under oath and withstand cross
examination and testify to the bizarre and unusual behavior and specific instances which are alleged?
10. If Dr. Peizer for instance disagrees with Chris Walters assessment that Attorney Tom Moseley
neglect to acquire copies of Chris Walters medical record for 6 months is within accepted norms for
the federal bar we can discuss the matter in great detail and maybe Tom Moseley won't get disbarred
from practicing Social Security law.
Review of Alleged Threats or
Imposition of Congressional Sanctions?
1. Dr. Susan Peizer PhD “testified further in the extreme level of socialization
as he threatened people in their offices, to include Judges and office worker, for many years.
2. Any person threatening a federal judge; a social security employee; or Social Security Judge
would be apprehended and arrested instantly and Dr. Piezer's report should include an extensive list
of arrest, convictions, and detentions at various penal facilities.
3. Chris Walters has of course has never met a Federal Judge; never met a Social Security
Judge; never attended a Social Security Hearing in person; never been in the chambers or before
the Court in a federal courthouse and has never spoken to your Administrative Law executive staff on the phone?
4. Couldn't we even be a little more honest and state that Chris Walters hires legal counsel or
withdraws appellate claims and has declined to appear in person in Social Security Hearings for 9
years and currently before the Appeals Council because he declines to meet with your staff in person?
5. Chris Walters would bet money that Congressional staff threatened your staff in December, 2005
when they learned your agency has spent the last 9 years trying to compel a homeless person to amend the
key provisions of the largest item on federal budget otherwise known as Title 42 Sec 423 (d)(5)(b)Disability Determinations.
6. Congressman Bob Goodlatte learned that Texans in San Antonio, Texas were trying to amend
Title 7 USC 2011 and you can bet as Chairman of the Committee on Agriculture he did not appreciate
it in the least and possibly privately threatened folks in San Antonio.
7. Congressman Lamar Smith's letter of Janurary 18th, 2005 states" Thank you for taking the time
to write and letting me know of your survey information on the Social Security program. I appreciate
having the benefit of the information".
8. Congressman Lamar Smith is Chairman of House Judiciary Subcommittee on the Courts,Internet, and
Intellectual Property an by definition of law decides what is the law; what is appropriate; and who will
sit on the federal bench and no Federal Judge will remain on the bench long by critizing the Congressman's findings.
9. Congressman Bob Goodlatte is another Chairman of House Committee on Judiciary who is reviewing Chris
Walters operational audits of social service programs and in his letter of October 16,2001 states: "Thank you
for your recent letter and link to your website"
10. If members of the Social Security staff are found on Capitol Hill or in Committee business or
praticing in the Congressional Record they are subject to arrest by Capitol Police unless they have
been authorized to appear by summons or subponea. Your staff's characterizations of materials plainly
marked "Evidence and Testimony Before Congress" may be sufficent to warrant prosecution under
Title 18 USC 1505 Obstruction of proceedings before departments, agencies, and committees.
11. Chris Walters suggest that Dr. Piezer and Judge Herbert used the proceeding as a political
vehicle to attack and criticize members of Congress whose have repeatedly sanctioned your staff
over a period of years.
12. The United States Supreme Court ruled in US V Haldeman, Erlichman, and Dean that the 40 government
officials who opened counsel papers were prosecuted under Title 18 USC 242 Deprivation of rights under
color of law.
13. The Appeals Council is probally unaware of the fact that the San Antonio City Council is a revolving
door for the federal prison system where corruption is shortlived and regularily rewarded by substantial prison terms.
14. That we can tell any lie which is convenient is a mentality found in the conviction of former HUD
Secretary and councilman Henry Cisneros who was convicted of lying to Congress and former Congressman
Bustamente doing years in prison for corruption. Former State Attorney General Dan Morales who pleaded
the "Divine Right of Kings" on behalf of your agency in USDC, WDT in 1997 is currently in federal prison
in Texarkana, Texas.
15. Does the San Antonio community view these individual as outcast or lowlifes? The situational
ethics which prevade San Antonio and the Decision of Judge Herbert provides that the folks we described
are viewed as heroes whose time in prison is viewed as a badge of honor.
16. The San Antonio Metropolitan Ministries of San Antonio is operated by the Catholic Church is a
well known killing ground where clients are stabbed and injured and where the police drive by and ignore
drug abuse and drinking. Dr. Piezer 's comments about homeless are believed to be inappropriate
because after all Dr. Piezer community lacks the ability to provide the simple services required by
the US Department of HUD for drug free, alochol free; and abuse free facilities. Dr. Piezer lacks
the credentials to practice in a field where Chris Walters is a nationally recognized expert whose
research has created several federal statutes.
17. Possibly the Appeals Council will share Chris Walters insight into the disobedince of Judge
Herbert's refusal to complete the Record and scam the process as typical sociopathic behavior which
prevades all of South Texas.
Chris Walters Rebuttal
Chris Walters will present a recent newspaper article from Winston Salem Journal, in Winston Salem, NC citing
persons who have known him since 2001 who explain Chris Walters is a great and wonderful person of excellent
character who donates his time to public institutions. Mr. Willis Miller (336-784-1962-ext 26) the Assistance
Director of the Samaritan Ministries explained his shelter has known Chris Walters for 5 years and never had a
disciplinary problem with Chris who he explains has excellent and outstanding deportment to the newspaper. Mr. Miller
and his staff deal with problem clients and mental health clients as described by Dr. Piezer on a daily basis.
Chris Walters will also present as rebuttal omissions of fact and merit described below which Judge Herbert left
out of his report including: numerous of public commendations; and thanks from professionals in law enforcement
and emergency management which are on line on the enclosed resume. Chris Walters role in creating several federal
statutes such as Community Service Block Grants and
Welfare Reform Act of 1996 ;
Title 42 USC 11301;
Title 7 USC 2014(b) Food stamps
Chris Walters operational audits form found on the CD-Rom and on line http://www.angelfire.com/dc2/107thcongress suggest
that information about homeless processes are not based on vague mumbled industry words concerns urban legends but on field work by a qualified investigator.
Extensive audits of program functions or as the GAO explains operational impediments frequently become federal law and
city master plans such as those found on various resume pages require more skill than shucking the blame for failures
on the clients who after all don't operate the 250 Billion a year nonprofit industry. We have a long term problem with
minor staff and other representatives fielding technical; unauthorized; and inappropriate legal questions to Chris Walters a person regarded as an "Officer of the Court" which violate the Order of the 5th US Circuit Court of Appeals. The legal FYI cited at the end of this brief suggest Chris Walters is not authorized by any Magistrate or Federal Judge to practice; vend or dispense any law here in the United States and your staff is not authorized to practice law with either the US Congress of the United Nations.
Dr. Robert Canon's Reviews of Your Findings
Dr. Robert Canon is a PHD in social work and clinical psychology who has known Chris Walters for over a decade and volunteered to assist Chris Walters prepare his 135 megabyte Resume and background information. Preparing thousands of pages of resume is a long time consuming process which however does provide excellent opportunities to acquire skills for future employment.
Dr. Canon responded to your comments as: "I tend to assume that you have some time on your hands and building ironic web pages in the vein of Jonathan Swift's A Modest Proposal is an entertaining way to work on your html skills. I noticed in the decision, though, that the judge had an "expert" testify to the effect that you're suffering from a "personality disorder". Providing meticulously crafted, densely populated web pages full of ironic passive aggression kind of plays into that perception. It might be best to keep the web pages for the amusement of you and your friends and focus specifically on the issues in your case during the appeal. I agree that the vague mention of threats you've made to judges and staff are preposterous and his decision was vague in general. "
We could if your agency would like to have Dr. Canon review the current CD-Rom and identify specific problem areas? We have to ask is the Social Security Administration in the business of telling claimants what they can or can’t have on
their Resume?
Does The Social Security Administration
Need Additional Embarassment?
Chris Walters has enclosed an extensive database of review of apparent human rights abuses involving
the Social Security process and has an opportunity to either have it reviewed by a US District Court or
begin serious considerations of asking the United Nations to place some of the the Social Security Administration
processes into control of a "Special Master" for Human and Civil Rights concern. If I worked at the Appeals
Council I wouldn't want to have anyone explain to a either a US District Court Judge; the United Nations the
problems plaguing your agency. Would you want someone like Chris Walters acquiring even partial control
of my organization or trying to place sanctions on it?
Proposed Agreement With Social Security Appeals Council ?
What is a hard working federal employee to do when it appears Judge Herbert and his expert dropped the ball?
We go back to the basic US Code which is Title 42 Sec 423 (d)(5)(b)Disability Determinations and the consultative
exams recently completed by your experts in Washington State DSHS which outlines a clear cut course of action based
on treatment and returning Chris Walters to work:
1. I would recommend payments of SSI to Chris Walters for a period of 1 calendar year to evaluate and
possibly treat existing medical conditions and see if gainful employment is a possibility at the end of the
target period.
2. A qualified doctor will perform and complete the "colonoscopy with the idea of finding out if the
problem is treatable. We recommend consideration of your expert Dr. Pinon who felt the process could
be cause by chronic infections which are highly treatable.
3. Several medical authorities have suggested C. diff a colon disease absorbs "potassium" which in
turn might cause the heart problems which require regular medication involving Lassix and 20 MEQ Potassium.
4. A Cardiologist will do another "echocardiogram" and determine if evidence of heart disease is
present and hopefully will not present another report trying to explain why portions of Chris Walters
heart are missing.
5. A qualified vascular surgeon will complete the exam of the lower legs like Dr. Strandberg recommended
and see if the damage is can be corrected to put Chris Walters back on his feet long enough to return to work
as a security guard.
6. Dr. Robert Canon is Chris Walters long term computer trainer and a PHD in Psychology who already
supervises Chris Walters computer training and will expand his work to check for any alleged threats or
other dangerous whatever.
7. Dr. Strandberg's report suggest Chris Walters might be able to do sedentary work and our training
efforts will involve computer oriented work or some bonded position which does not require extensive physical activity.
8. Dr. Susan Peizer professional opinion is that Chris Walters: “testified further in the extreme level of
socialization as he threatened people in their offices, to include Judges and office worker, for many years.
Even if Dr. Peizer does not meet Chris Walters in person she should be able from the date of 4-30-2006 be able
to acquire extensive evidence of threats; bizarre of threatening behavior; acquire witnesses who can be called
to testify under oath. The good doctor should have no problems acquiring loads of evidence.
9. An agreement will exist between Chris Walters and the Appeals Council that Chris Walters will not accept
or be treated by conditions of financial convenience to the Social Security Adminsitration. If your agency has
special incentives for veterans Chris Walters will not become a veteran so your agency can get more money.
Chris Walters will not become or be treated for substance abuse or become a convicted felons because we have
a special rate for felon. Chris Walters is not going to develop a treatable mental illness simply because of
HHS programs which pay a higher rate to agencies or financial incentives. Chris Walters medical treatment will
revolved around medical documented illness.
10. Assignment of a new Social Security# because of damage to bondability through misuse of
Chris Walters social security # will assist me to remain or work in a bondable position.
11. We are asking the Appeals Council to authorize medicare or medicde payments so that diagnosis and
treatment can begin without extended delay.
12. Disability period is asked to be assigned as 1 year with the results to be reviewed by the
Appeals Council and not lower level employees to avoid additional abuse of the social security process.
With Kindest Regards Chris Walters
Appellate Counsel of Record
US Circuit Court of Appeals
|
|
Citation Appendix
1. Public Commendation for Chris Walters social service research
http://www.angelfire.com/tx6/vocrehab/service/index.html
2. Public Commendations and access to federal statutes which Chris Walters research helped
create and research emergency management accessed off:
http://www.geocities.com/chrissaidthanks2005.
3. Standard for auditing social service agencies:
http://www.angelfire.com/dc2/107thcongress
4. Pathology report for deviations in the Social Security process:
http://www.geocities.com/tulipsthorns
5. Standardized legal fyi which explains Chris Walters can't answer legal questions
is online:
http://www.geocities.com/tulipsthorns/herberte.htm
Notice Of Appeal To Appeals Council,
Office of Hearings and Appeals
5107 Leesburg Pike
Falls Church, VA 22041-3255
Proposal For Settlement & Agreement Filed
With Social Security Appeals Council April, 2006
Mr. Chris Walters
Social Security #261-90-6357
C/o Mr. Ben Morgan
(Message 336-765-5383)
1451 Brookcrest Drive
Winston Salem ,NC 27106
Social Security Administration
5205 UNIVERSITY PKWY
WINSTON SALEM, NC 27106
(336) 767-3736
RE: Written Appeals To Appeals Council:
Dear Social Security Administration:
I am visiting Winston Salem, NC and doing some volunteer work at the Forsyth County
Public Library and have been notified that Administrative Law Judge William Herbert
of San Antonio, Texas has made a partially favorable decision on April, 20th, 2006 on my behalf.
In the enclosed documents I have asked the Appeals Council to review the Judge’s
Decision and address some technical questions. Although I am not a legal resident
of either Texas or North Carolina my friend Mr. Ben Morgan has again agreed to hold
any mail for me that your staff might wish to send.
With Kindest Regards
Chris Walters, Claimant
Commissioner Michael J. Astrue
Social Security Administration
Office of Public Inquiries
Windsor Park Building
6401 Security Blvd.
Baltimore, MD 21235
Exhibit #319-Appendix Other Communications Too
and From Social Security
These are extra administrative communications to and from the Social Security Administration which
includes this link on other matters:
from "Forest, Cathy"
Cathy.Forest@ssa.gov
to chris.saidthanks2006@gmail.com
cc "Luna, Roland"
date Apr 13, 2007 8:45 AM
Subject Scheduling Social Security Hearing
Mr. Walters, after a cursory review of your file, it appears that you may want your hearing to
be in a location other than San Antonio so that you do not have to travel great distances to a
hearing. However, until we know where you are so that we can provide a closer hearing site, we
cannot forward the claim file to your preferred location.
It appears you want your postal mail sent in care of Dr. Robert Canon in Austin, TX. Even though
your mail goes to a Texas address, if you provide an address at the preferred hearing site, we can
forward your claim to that location.
Please respond to Mr. Roland Luna at roland.luna@ssa.gov
Thanks, Cathy
From Chris Walters
chris.saidthanks2006@gmail.com
to roland.luna@ssa.gov,
Cathy.Forest@ssa.gov,
chris.saidthanks2006@gmail.com
date Apr 14, 2007 9:43 AM
Subject Reply your email conclusion Walters V SSA USDC,NM 07CV-257
Dear Roland Luna
Forest, Cathy
Social Security Administration
roland.luna@ssa.gov
Cathy.Forest@ssa.gov
Thank you for your recent email and notifying me of a hearing
on SSI issues. If you visit this website you can see we have
already been in a USDC,NM Walters v Astrue 07-257 and
reached an agreement which is attached:
http://www.angelfire.com/nc3/ssireform/nm/index.html
Medical Records Website:
http://www.geocities.com/chrissaidthanks2003
I will be claiming residence in New Mexico
Chris Walters
c/o PO Box 160
Las Cruces, NM 88004
The worker who is familiar with the claim and resolving
the issues is:
Technical Expert Betsy Huber
2141 Summit Court
Las Cruces, NM 88001
(505-523-9313 ext 1215
(Fax 505-525-0946
I have enclosed a letter to Social Security General Counsel
Thomas Crawley asking if I can submit medical records to your
organization and if he approves will probably provide the records
on CD-Rom
Please feel free to contact me via email.
Chris Walters
261-90-6357
2 attachments — appeals.rtf
generalcounsel.doc
from "Luna, Roland"
Roland.Luna@ssa.gov
to Chris Walters chris.saidthanks2006@gmail.com
date Apr 19, 2007 6:30 AM
Subject RE: Thanks again fyi technical or legal issues:
Good morning Mr. Walters, being that you stated that you will be
residing in Las Cruces, New Mexico, I will be transferring you case to
Albuquerque NM, being that NM is not our Jurisdiction.
SSA ODAR HEARING OFC SUITE 200
555 BROADWAY NE
ALBUQUERQUE, NM 87102-2362
BUSINESS # 505-346-7823
FAX # 505-346-7862
From: Chris Walters
mailto:chris.saidthanks2006@gmail.com
Sent: Monday, April 16, 2007 12:41 PM
To: Luna, Roland; chris.saidthanks2006@gmail.com
Subject: Thanks again fyi technical or legal issues:
Good Morning Luna, Roland"
Roland.Luna@ssa.gov
I wanted to thank you again for contacting me concerning my SSI
claim for Christopher Walters 261-90-6357 and Walters V Asture USDC, NM
07-cv-0257. Any legal questions or technical issues should be directed
to these parties who are representing Social Security Administration's
interest and can file briefs or provide any legal assist you might
require:
Larry Gomez, USA
P.O. Box 607
Albuquerque, NM 87103
(505)346-7296
Fax (505)346-7274
General Counsel Thomas W. Crawley
Social Security Administration
Office of Public Inquiries
Windsor Park Building
6401 Security Blvd.
Baltimore, MD 21235
Technical Expert Betsy Huber
2141 Summit Court
Las Cruces, NM 88011
(505-523-9313 ext 1215
Fax 505-525-0946
Many thanks again
Chris Walters,
Plaintiff Pro Se
c/o PO Box 160
Las Cruces, NM 88004
Exhibit #315 Citation of Authority
Title 42 USC 405 (G)(H) Judicial Review
1. Title 42 USC 405(g) Judicial review
Any individual, after any final decision of the Commissioner of Social Security made after a hearing to which he was
a party, irrespective of the amount in controversy, may obtain a review of such decision by a civil action commenced
within sixty days after the mailing to him of notice of such decision or within such further time as the Commissioner
of Social Security may allow. Such action shall be brought in the district court of the United States for the judicial
district in which the plaintiff resides, or has his principal place of business, or, if he does not reside or have his
principal place of business within any such judicial district, in the United States District Court for the District of
Columbia.
As part of the Commissioner’s answer the Commissioner of Social Security shall file a certified copy of the transcript
of the record including the evidence upon which the findings and decision complained of are based. The court shall
have power to enter, upon the pleadings and transcript of the record, a judgment affirming, modifying, or reversing the
decision of the Commissioner of Social Security, with or without remanding the cause for a rehearing.
The findings of the Commissioner of Social Security as to any fact, if supported by substantial evidence, shall be
conclusive, and where a claim has been denied by the Commissioner of Social Security or a decision is rendered under
subsection (b) of this section which is adverse to an individual who was a party to the hearing before the Commissioner
of Social Security, because of failure of the claimant or such individual to submit proof in conformity with any regulation
prescribed under subsection (a) of this section, the court shall review only the question of conformity with such
regulations and the validity of such regulations.
The court may, on motion of the Commissioner of Social Security made
for good cause shown before the Commissioner files the Commissioner’s answer, remand the case to the Commissioner of
Social Security for further action by the Commissioner of Social Security, and it may at any time order additional
evidence to be taken before the Commissioner of Social Security, but only upon a showing that there is new evidence
which is material and that there is good cause for the failure to incorporate such evidence into the record in a prior
proceeding; and the Commissioner of Social Security shall, after the case is remanded, and after hearing such additional
evidence if so ordered, modify or affirm the Commissioner’s findings of fact or the Commissioner’s decision, or both, and
shall file with the court any such additional and modified findings of fact and decision, and, in any case in which the
Commissioner has not made a decision fully favorable to the individual, a transcript of the additional record and
testimony upon which the Commissioner’s action in modifying or affirming was based.
Such additional or modified
findings of fact and decision shall be reviewable only to the extent provided for review of the original findings
of fact and decision. The judgment of the court shall be final except that it shall be subject to review in the
same manner as a judgment in other civil actions. Any action instituted in accordance with this subsection shall
survive notwithstanding any change in the person occupying the office of Commissioner of Social Security or any
vacancy in such office.
2. Title 42 USC 405(h) Finality of Commissioner’s decision The findings and decision of the Commissioner of Social Security after a
hearing shall be binding upon all individuals who were parties to such hearing. No findings of fact or decision of the Commissioner
of Social Security shall be reviewed by any person, tribunal, or governmental agency except as herein provided. No action against
the United States, the Commissioner of Social Security, or any officer or employee thereof shall be brought under
Title 28 USC 1331 or
Title 28 USC 1346 to recover on any claim arising under this subchapter.
|
|
Press To Enlarge
ODAR Hearing Materials
Office of Disability Adjudication & Review
3116 W March Lane #200
Stockton, CA 95249
Press To Enlarge
ODAR Hearing Materials
Office of Disability Adjudication & Review
3116 W March Lane #200
Stockton, CA 95249
Press To Enlarge
ODAR Hearing Materials
Office of Disability Adjudication & Review
3116 W March Lane #200
Stockton, CA 95249
