Johnson v. Kijakazi
4:21-cv-00229-WTM-CLR
| S.D. Ga. | Aug 29, 2023Background
- Plaintiff Michael J. Johnson sought review under 42 U.S.C. § 405(g) of the Commissioner's denial of Social Security benefits.
- After an administrative remand, the ALJ issued an unfavorable decision and Johnson timely filed "exceptions" with the Appeals Council under 20 C.F.R. § 404.984(b).
- The Appeals Council had not resolved those exceptions when Johnson filed this district-court action.
- The Commissioner moved to dismiss for lack of subject-matter jurisdiction, arguing the ALJ decision was not "final" while exceptions were pending.
- Johnson argued the regulation is ambiguous and that filing this suit before Appeals Council action was appropriate to avoid a procedural trap.
- The magistrate judge found the Commissioner’s interpretation persuasive, concluded the ALJ decision was nonfinal while exceptions were pending, and recommended dismissal for lack of jurisdiction.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the district court has jurisdiction to review an ALJ decision while the Appeals Council is considering timely-filed exceptions under 20 C.F.R. § 404.984 | Johnson: regulation is ambiguous; filing in district court before Appeals Council acts was required to avoid a procedural trap | Commissioner: timely-filed exceptions mean the Appeals Council will consider/assume jurisdiction and the ALJ decision is not final, depriving the court of jurisdiction | Court: Dismiss for lack of jurisdiction; ALJ decision is nonfinal while exceptions are pending |
| Whether § 404.984(b) permits judicial review before the Appeals Council issues a notice addressing exceptions | Johnson: possibility that Appeals Council may not assume jurisdiction creates risk and allows earlier filing | Commissioner: § 404.984(b) mandates that the Appeals Council will consider exceptions and issue a notice; thus no final decision exists until its action | Court: Agrees with Commissioner; finality requires Appeals Council action on exceptions |
Key Cases Cited
- Heckler v. Ringer, 466 U.S. 602 (federal courts may review only final decisions of the Commissioner under the Social Security Act)
- Widman v. Commissioner of Social Security Admin., [citation="230 F. App'x 708"] (pending administrative proceedings deprive district court of jurisdiction)
- Symonette v. V.A. Leasing Corp., [citation="648 F. App'x 787"] (procedural consequence: failure to timely object waives appellate rights)
- Mitchell v. United States, [citation="612 F. App'x 542"] (same)