Osmund McGowen v. Patricia R. Harris, Secretary of Health and Human Services

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• explaining that the court lacks jurisdiction to review a decision not to reopen a claim for benefits unless there are constitutional questions at issue
• explaining that new and material evidence may “be revealed as going only to establish the same claim earlier denied, so that res judicata is legally available to bar its consideration on the merits”
• “the district court has jurisdiction to determine its own jurisdiction by examining the res judicata predicate”
• the only relevant evidence was plaintiff's condition after the administratively final decision
• “The unitary nature of the 21 claim is not affected by the fact that following denial on the merits of the claim as originally 22 presented, the claimant presented ‘new and material’ evidence tending to establish . . . [his 23 entitlement].”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).