Smith v. Commissioner of Social Security
880 F.3d 813
6th Cir.2018Background
- Ricky Lee Smith applied for SSI in 2012 alleging disability; after a hearing before ALJ Bowling, an unfavorable decision was issued on March 26, 2014, signed by ALJ Don Paris on behalf of Bowling.
- The notice gave Smith 60 days to request Appeals Council review; Smith’s attorney later claimed he mailed a written request on April 24, 2014, but no postmark or independent proof was provided.
- The SSA did not receive the request until October 1, 2014 (about four months late); the Appeals Council dismissed the request as untimely for lack of good cause to extend time.
- Smith sued in district court seeking review of the Appeals Council’s dismissal and alleging due process violations; the district court dismissed for lack of jurisdiction and for failure to raise a colorable constitutional claim.
- On appeal, the Sixth Circuit affirmed, holding the Appeals Council’s dismissal of an untimely petition is not a “final decision” under 42 U.S.C. § 405(g) and rejecting Smith’s due process arguments.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether Appeals Council’s dismissal of untimely review request is judicially reviewable as a "final decision" | Smith argued his counsel timely mailed request, so dismissal should be reviewable | Commissioner argued denial of untimely request is discretionary and not a final decision under §405(g) | Not reviewable; dismissal of untimely request is not a final decision absent colorable constitutional claim |
| Whether Smith raised a colorable due process claim based on alleged timely mailing | Smith claimed deprivation of due process because his timely mailing was disregarded | Commissioner pointed to absence of independent proof (postmark/receipt) and SSA records showing late receipt rebutting presumption of mailing | No colorable due process claim; no jurisdiction without such a claim |
| Whether signature by a different ALJ violated procedures or due process | Smith alleged due process violation/fraud because ALJ Paris signed instead of ALJ Bowling | Commissioner relied on HALLEX authority allowing Hearing Office Chief ALJ to sign if presiding ALJ approved final draft | No violation; HALLEX permits signature by Chief ALJ and no prejudice shown |
| Whether failing to attach 1988 favorable decision to the record denied due process | Smith argued ALJ referenced 1988 decision but did not include it as exhibit | Commissioner noted issue was not raised below and lack of record attachment does not amount to constitutional deprivation | Forfeited before district court; in any event not a colorable due process violation |
Key Cases Cited
- Califano v. Sanders, 430 U.S. 99 (recognizing that denial of administrative petition to reopen is not judicially reviewable absent colorable constitutional claim)
- Hilmes v. Secretary of Health & Human Servs., 983 F.2d 67 (6th Cir.) (dismissing untimely hearing request as unreviewable)
- Bloodsworth v. Heckler, 703 F.2d 1233 (11th Cir.) (noting circuit split; Eleventh Circuit treated issue differently)
- Sheehan v. Sec’y of Health, Educ. & Welfare, 593 F.2d 323 (8th Cir.) (explaining why allowing review of late filings would undermine administrative finality)
- McKentry v. Secretary of Health & Human Servs., 655 F.2d 721 (6th Cir.) (holding that mere presence of documents in agency file is not proof of mailing)