califano
sanders
argued
decided
february
section
administrative
procedure
act
apa
providing
generally
judicial
review
actions
federal
administrative
agencies
persons
aggrieved
actions
afford
implied
grant
district
courts
jurisdiction
review
decision
secretary
health
education
welfare
reopen
previously
adjudicated
claim
social
security
benefits
interpretation
favor
jurisdiction
suggested
neither
text
history
apa
effectively
override
congress
recent
decision
expand
jurisdiction
eliminating
requirement
prerequisite
maintaining
actions
federal
agencies
officers
employees
thereof
retaining
social
security
act
limitation
jurisdiction
pp
social
security
act
provides
individual
final
decision
secretary
made
hearing
party
irrespective
amount
controversy
may
obtain
review
decision
civil
action
commenced
within
days
authorize
judicial
review
secretary
decision
absent
constitutional
challenge
petition
reopen
prior
final
decision
may
denied
without
hearing
whereas
judicial
review
limited
final
decision
made
hearing
moreover
allow
judicial
review
frustrate
congressional
purpose
evidenced
impose
limitation
upon
review
secretary
final
decision
pp
reversed
brennan
delivered
opinion
white
marshall
blackmun
powell
rehnquist
joined
stewart
filed
opinion
concurring
judgment
burger
joined
post
stevens
took
part
consideration
decision
case
maurice
rosenberg
argued
cause
petitioner
briefs
solicitor
general
bork
assistant
attorney
general
lee
deputy
solicitor
general
jones
robert
kopp
william
kowalski
argued
cause
filed
brief
respondent
dennis
sweeney
filed
brief
administrative
law
center
legal
aid
bureau
amicus
curiae
urging
reversal
justice
brennan
delivered
opinion
questions
decision
whether
administrative
procedure
act
independent
grant
district
courts
jurisdiction
review
decision
secretary
health
education
welfare
reopen
previously
adjudicated
claim
social
security
benefits
whether
social
security
act
authorizes
judicial
review
secretary
decision
title
ii
social
security
act
provides
disability
benefits
claimant
demonstrates
suffers
physical
mental
disability
within
meaning
act
disability
arose
prior
expiration
insured
status
administrative
process
begun
files
claim
social
security
administration
cfr
claim
administratively
denied
regulations
permit
administrative
reconsideration
within
period
request
reconsideration
prove
unsuccessful
claimant
may
within
days
ask
evidentiary
hearing
administrative
law
judge
supp
discretionary
appeal
adverse
determination
law
judge
lies
appeals
council
cfr
finally
act
authorizes
federal
judicial
review
final
decision
secretary
made
hearing
claimant
party
act
regulations
thus
create
orderly
administrative
mechanism
district
review
final
decision
secretary
assist
original
processing
claims
filed
annually
administration
see
social
security
administration
year
review
administration
social
security
programs
regulation
however
administrative
scheme
provides
additional
consideration
claim
form
regulations
reopening
agency
determination
within
specified
time
limits
date
initial
determination
months
matter
right
four
years
upon
finding
good
cause
exists
new
material
evidence
provided
specific
errors
discovered
cfr
moreover
regulations
permit
reopening
time
purpose
correcting
clerical
errors
errors
face
relevant
evidence
january
respondent
filed
initial
claim
agency
disability
payments
disability
insurance
benefits
alleging
inability
work
epilepsy
blackout
spells
claim
proceeded
several
steps
administrative
procedures
administrative
law
judge
found
respondent
ineligible
benefits
ground
demonstrated
relevant
disability
sufficient
severity
appeals
council
june
sustained
decision
respondent
pursue
judicial
review
secretary
final
decision
almost
seven
years
later
march
respondent
filed
second
claim
alleging
bases
eligibility
claim
processed
administrative
channels
secretary
regulations
administrative
law
judge
viewed
new
application
barred
res
judicata
see
cfr
also
treated
application
requiring
determination
whether
claimant
entitled
prior
application
reopened
app
concluding
respondent
evidence
merely
rep
titio
cumulative
finding
errors
face
evidence
administrative
law
judge
denied
reopening
dismissed
claim
respondent
thereupon
filed
action
district
northern
district
indiana
challenging
secretary
decision
reopen
resting
jurisdiction
district
dismissed
complaint
ground
stated
unpublished
memorandum
without
jurisdiction
consider
subject
matter
suit
pet
cert
appeals
seventh
circuit
reversed
sanders
weinberger
appeals
agreed
jurisdiction
review
refusal
reopen
claim
proceeding
ground
abuse
discretion
authorized
social
security
act
held
however
limit
judicial
review
methods
expressly
authorize
social
security
act
therefore
appeals
concluded
administrative
procedure
act
apa
contains
independent
grant
jurisdiction
without
regard
amount
controversy
afforded
district
jurisdiction
respondent
complaint
granted
certiorari
sub
nom
mathews
sanders
reverse
ii
appeals
acknowledged
construction
apa
independent
grant
jurisdiction
contrary
conclusion
reached
several
courts
appeals
conflict
understandable
none
codified
statutory
sections
constitute
phrased
like
usual
grant
jurisdiction
proceed
federal
courts
hand
statute
undoubtedly
evinces
congress
intention
understanding
judicial
review
widely
available
challenge
actions
federal
administrative
officials
consequently
courts
commentators
sharply
divided
whether
statute
read
provide
distinct
basis
jurisdiction
review
agency
actions
three
decisions
arguably
assumed
little
discussion
apa
independent
grant
jurisdiction
see
citizens
preserve
overton
park
volpe
abbott
laboratories
gardner
rusk
cort
however
act
congress
enacted
since
grant
certiorari
case
persuades
us
better
view
apa
interpreted
implied
grant
jurisdiction
review
agency
actions
october
congress
enacted
pub
stat
amends
eliminate
requirement
specified
amount
controversy
prerequisite
maintenance
action
brought
agency
thereof
officer
employee
thereof
official
capacity
obvious
effect
modification
subject
statutes
created
retained
congress
confer
jurisdiction
federal
courts
review
agency
action
regardless
whether
apa
force
may
serve
jurisdictional
predicate
conclude
amendment
largely
undercuts
rationale
interpreting
apa
independent
jurisdictional
provision
noted
previously
actual
text
apa
nowhere
contains
explicit
grant
jurisdiction
challenge
agency
action
federal
courts
furthermore
even
advocates
jurisdiction
apa
acknowledge
basis
concluding
congress
enacting
apa
actually
conceived
act
jurisdictional
terms
see
byse
fiocca
supra
thus
argument
favor
apa
jurisdiction
rests
exclusively
broad
policy
consideration
given
shortcomings
federal
mandamus
jurisdiction
construction
warranted
rational
policy
affording
federal
judicial
review
actions
federal
officials
acting
pursuant
federal
law
notwithstanding
absence
requisite
jurisdictional
amount
see
jaffe
supra
find
argument
compelling
light
congress
apparent
intention
amendment
restructure
afresh
scope
jurisdiction
amending
congress
obviously
expressly
acted
fill
jurisdictional
void
created
requirement
new
jurisdictional
grant
qualified
however
retention
preclusive
actions
arise
social
security
act
read
together
expansion
coupled
retention
apparently
expresses
congress
view
desired
contours
jurisdiction
agency
action
broad
reading
apa
instance
serve
purpose
modify
congress
new
jurisdictional
enactment
overriding
decision
limit
preservation
squarely
faced
question
apa
jurisdiction
first
time
congress
explicit
entry
jurisdictional
area
counsels
reading
apa
implied
jurisdictional
grant
designed
solely
fill
interstitial
gap
jurisdiction
particularly
since
neither
text
history
apa
speaks
favor
reading
congress
redefining
appears
envisioned
apa
playing
stopgap
role
thus
conclude
apa
afford
implied
grant
jurisdiction
permitting
federal
judicial
review
agency
action
respondent
contends
notwithstanding
social
security
act
specifically
construed
authorize
judicial
review
final
decision
secretary
reopen
claim
benefits
courts
appeals
considered
contention
rejected
also
agree
read
authorize
judicial
review
alleged
abuses
agency
discretion
refusing
reopen
claims
social
security
benefits
pertinent
part
provides
individual
final
decision
secretary
made
hearing
party
irrespective
amount
controversy
may
obtain
review
decision
civil
action
commenced
within
sixty
days
emphasis
supplied
respondent
argues
however
weinberger
salfi
mathews
eldridge
rejected
interpretation
agree
true
cases
authorized
judicial
review
secretary
decision
deny
discontinue
social
security
benefits
notwithstanding
absence
prior
hearing
instances
however
claimants
challenged
secretary
decisions
constitutional
grounds
constitutional
questions
obviously
unsuited
resolution
administrative
hearing
procedures
therefore
access
courts
essential
decision
questions
furthermore
since
jurisdiction
precluded
weinberger
salfi
supra
decision
denying
jurisdiction
salfi
eldridge
effectively
closed
federal
forum
adjudication
colorable
constitutional
claims
thus
cases
merely
adhered
principle
constitutional
questions
issue
availability
judicial
review
presumed
read
statutory
scheme
take
extraordinary
step
foreclosing
jurisdiction
unless
congress
intent
manifested
clear
convincing
evidence
johnson
robison
one
rare
instances
secretary
denial
petition
reopen
challenged
constitutional
grounds
respondent
seeks
additional
opportunity
establish
satisfies
social
security
act
eligibility
standards
disability
benefits
therefore
afford
jurisdiction
case
reversed
footnotes
section
social
security
act
stat
added
amended
provides
pertinent
part
individual
final
decision
secretary
made
hearing
party
irrespective
amount
controversy
may
obtain
review
decision
civil
action
commenced
within
sixty
days
mailing
notice
decision
within
time
secretary
may
allow
section
social
security
act
provides
findings
decisions
secretary
hearing
shall
binding
upon
individuals
parties
hearing
findings
fact
decision
secretary
shall
reviewed
person
tribunal
governmental
agency
except
herein
provided
action
secretary
officer
employee
thereof
shall
brought
et
seq
title
recover
claim
arising
subchapter
section
held
require
exhaustion
available
administrative
procedures
foreclose
jurisdiction
general
grant
jurisdiction
route
review
see
weinberger
salfi
courts
appeals
first
fourth
fifth
seventh
ninth
tenth
district
columbia
circuits
held
apa
independent
grant
jurisdiction
see
bradley
weinberger
deering
milliken
johnston
ortego
weinberger
sanders
weinberger
case
brandt
hickel
brennan
udall
pickus
board
parole
app
courts
appeals
third
sixth
eighth
circuits
disagree
zimmerman
bramblett
desobry
twin
cities
chippewa
tribal
council
minnesota
chippewa
tribe
appeals
second
circuit
views
question
unsettled
see
south
windsor
convalescent
home
mathews
compare
byse
fiocca
section
mandamus
venue
act
nonstatutory
judicial
review
federal
administrative
action
harv
rev
davis
administrative
law
treatise
supp
jaffe
judicial
control
administrative
action
advocating
apa
jurisdiction
cramton
nonstatutory
review
federal
administrative
action
need
statutory
reform
sovereign
immunity
subject
matter
jurisdiction
parties
defendant
rev
wright
miller
cooper
federal
practice
procedure
jurisdiction
rejecting
apa
jurisdiction
title
makes
clear
person
wronged
agency
action
entitled
judicial
review
thereof
suggests
language
intended
independent
jurisdictional
foundation
since
judicial
review
proceed
specified
statute
competent
jurisdiction
clauses
seem
look
outside
sources
jurisdictional
authority
thus
best
text
ambiguous
providing
separate
grant
jurisdiction
respondent
argues
congress
intended
modification
supplementary
apa
therefore
contemplated
apa
remain
distinct
jurisdictional
provision
contrary
seems
true
legislative
history
suggests
congress
believed
apa
confer
jurisdiction
administrative
action
therefore
deletion
jurisdictional
amount
warranted
understanding
made
explicit
senate
judiciary
committee
anomaly
federal
jurisdiction
prevents
otherwise
competent
district
hearing
certain
cases
seeking
nonstatutory
review
federal
administrative
action
absent
jurisdictional
amount
controversy
required
general
federal
question
provision
cases
arise
federal
constitution
federal
statutes
committee
believes
appropriate
matters
exercise
federal
judicial
power
regardless
monetary
amount
involved
emphasis
supplied
see
see
cappadora
celebrezze
davis
richardson
ortego
weinberger
maddox
richardson
stuckey
weinberger
neighbors
secretary
health
education
welfare
justice
stewart
chief
justice
joins
concurring
judgment
agree
sanders
seek
judicial
review
secretary
refusal
reopen
final
decision
denying
social
security
benefits
arrive
conclusion
however
somewhat
shorter
route
section
social
security
act
full
findings
decisions
secretary
hearing
shall
binding
upon
individuals
parties
hearing
findings
fact
decision
secretary
shall
reviewed
person
tribunal
governmental
agency
except
herein
provided
action
secretary
officer
employee
thereof
shall
brought
et
seq
title
recover
claim
arising
subchapter
decision
weinberger
salfi
supports
reading
salfi
held
first
two
sentences
prevent
review
decisions
secretary
save
provided
act
provision
made
although
salfi
principally
concerned
assertion
jurisdiction
plaintiffs
like
sanders
also
relied
upon
administrative
procedure
act
see
brief
appellants
brief
appellees
app
weinberger
salfi
yet
ruled
plaintiffs
seek
review
district
dismissed
complaint
ther
sources
jurisdiction
foreclosed
thus
see
reason
case
consider
whether
apa
general
confers
jurisdiction
upon
district
courts
review
federal
administrative
action
even
specifically
unequivocally
limits
sanders
others
position
whatever
jurisdiction
provided
today
explains
ante
clearly
jurisdiction
latter
provision
review
secretary
refusal
reopen
decision
denying
benefits
sanders
accordingly
concur
judgment
salfi
treatment
first
two
sentences
requiring
exhaustion
administrative
remedies
way
inconsistent
reading
second
sentence
precluding
review
outside
sentence
simply
requires
review
take
place
within
confines
procedural
scheme
established
section
thus
bars
attempts
circumvent
procedures
whether
seeking
review
without
fulfilled
exhaustion
requirement
seeking
review
jurisdictional
grant
prescribe
administrative
steps
must
first
taken