The Disability Determination Services (DDS) may issue conflicting determinations when
collateral estoppel does not apply to a subsequent claim and, after completing development
of the claim, the DDS issues a denial.
Generally, these determinations are appropriate and should not be returned to the
DDS for resolution. For more information on when collateral estoppel does not apply,
see DI 11011.001D.
When a potential collateral estoppel situation was not properly considered or addressed,
the FO must take the following actions.
a. Both determinations were made at the initial or reconsideration level
The FO has jurisdiction for making a new or revised collateral estoppel determination
when adopting the prior disability determination or decision would be fully favorable
in a new initial claim or reconsideration.
The DDS has jurisdiction for a possible earlier EOD determination in certain Title
II collateral estoppel claims, as described in DI 27515.001. If the DDS made a conflicting determination in the new claim for the period beginning
with the prior EOD, forward the case for resolution to the DDS that made the determination
in the new claim.
b. At least one decision was made by an administrative law judge (ALJ) or the Appeals
Council (AC)
-
•
The FO must forward the claims to the regional office (RO), explaining the conflict
on the routing slip.
-
•
The RO Programs Coordinator works with the Office of Hearings Operations (OHO) to
coordinate the processing of the claim(s) that are with OHO.
-
•
The Regional Office Programs Coordinator works with the Office of Appellate Operations
(OAO) to coordinate the processing of the claim(s) that are with the AC.