Document: 524 U.S. 266118 S.Ct. 1984141 L.Ed.2d 269 Sandra K. FORNEY, Petitioner,v.Kenneth S. APFEL, Commissioner of Social Security. No. 97-5737. Supreme Court the United States Argued April 22, 1998. Decided June 15, Syllabus * Petitioner Forney sought judicial review a Security Administration final determination denying her disability benefits. When District found that inadequately supported by evidence and remanded case to agency for further proceedings pursuant sentence four 42 U.S.C. §405(g), appealed, contending agency's denial benefits should be reversed outright. The Ninth Circuit, however, decided she did not have legal right appeal. Before this Court, both Solicitor General agree had appeal, so an amicus has been appointed defend Circuit's decision. Held: A claimant seeking court reversal decision may appeal district order remanding §405(g). This previously held language Act's "judicial review'' provision-"district courts'' (reviewing, example, denials claims) "have power enter . judgment affirming, modifying or reversing [an agency] with without cause rehearing,'' such "judgment shall except it subject in same manner as'' other civil action judgments, §405(g) (emphases added)-means claim is "final judgment'' appealable under 28 §1291. Sullivan v. Finkelstein, 496 617, 110 2658, 563. Finkelstein differs from involved Government. However, Finkelstein's logic makes feature irrelevant here. That reasoned, primarily §405(g)'s language, fell within "class orders'' are Neither statute nor suggests could purposes Government, but claimant, permits inference finality turns on order's importance, availability avenue might emerge after remand. Circuit erred concluding because was prevailing party. party "aggrieved'' ordinarily can granting part remedy requested, Jose, 519 54, 56, 117 463, 465, 136 364; Forney, who administrative and, alternative, remand, received some, all, relief requested. disputes assertion rule permitting appeals these circumstances would impose additional, unnecessary, burdens upon federal courts. If proves wrong his prediction, must legislative, statutes at issue do give courts redefine subdivide classes cases where will (or not) lie. Pp. ____-____. 108 F.3d 228, remanded. BREYER, J., delivered opinion unanimous Court. Ralph Wilborn, Eugene, OR, petitioner. Lisa Blatt, Washington, DC, respondent. Allen R. Snyder, as curiae, support below. Justice BREYER 1 question whether proceedings. We conclude law authorizes 2 petitioner, applied §223 Act, added, 70 Stat. 815, amended, §423. Administrative Law Judge (ALJ) determined (1) worked since onset medical problem, (2) more than minimally disabled, (3) disabled enough qualify automatically. Moreover, disability, (4) while sufficiently serious prevent return former work (cook, kitchen manager, baker), (5) holding jobs available economy (such clerk telephone answering service operator). App. 12-28. ALJ consequently denied claim, id., 28, Administration's Appeals Council Forney's request review, Pet. Cert. 39-40; see generally Bowen Yuckert, 482 137, 140-142, 107 2287, 2290-2292, 96 119 (1987) (setting forth five-part "disability'' test); 20 CFR §404.1520 (1997) (same). 3 then Federal determination-that hold jobs-inadequately those "require frequent constant reaching,'' record showed "ability reach impaired.'' Secretary, Civ. 94-6357 (D.Ore., May 1, 1995); 127-128. entered judgment, which (pursuant §405(g)). Id., 128. 4 remand order. She contended that, Government already sufficient opportunity prove existence relevant employment (and reasons), hear Chater, 234 (1997). 5 certiorari. Both agreed Court's judgment. suggested we reverse granted certiorari consider merits position, now heard II 6 Section 1291 Title Code grants "courts jurisdiction all decisions (emphasis added). falls scope jurisdictional grant. its authority special provision says, fourth sentence, "district court[s]'' 7 "shall modifying, [agency] added), 8 adds, eighth 9 actions,'' ibid. 10 statutory means what namely, benefit §1291 is, therefore, appealable. 563 (1990); also Shalala Schaefer, 509 292, 294, 113 2625, 2628, 125 239 (1993) (statute requires attorney's fees application filed "thirty days filing 30 entry "sentence four'' order, remand). 11 identical before us. It Government; involves claimant. need immediate arguably greater there invalidated set Health Human Services regulations, difficult obtain appellate matter general importance. Further, said specifically "express no about appealability'' seeks "appeal ground that'' broader relief. U.S., 623, n. 3, S.Ct., 2663, 3. 12 logic, features focused Congress made "appealable §1291.'' 628, 2665. class. Nothing either opinion, "final'' only when so. Nor does opinion's reasoning permit "finality'' lack availability) different, later, 13 itself recognized any effort "to conclude'' "not claimant'' "inconsistent'' Finkelstein. F.3d, 232. added "error attempt retain jurisdiction'' case; wrote ended "civil action,'' ""final' formalistic sense parties it.'' Ibid. 14 nonetheless reached "no appeal'' conclusion-but different ground. pointed out "party normally [a] favor.'' (citing Electrical Fittings Corp. Thomas & Betts Co., 307 241, 242, 59 860, 860-861, 83 L.Ed. 1263 (1939)). And obtained favor Because "may, secure seeks,'' wrote, "prevailing'' therefore cannot 232-233. 15 agree. concede receives he aggrieved affording Deposit Guaranty Nat. Bank Roper, 445 326, 333, 100 1166, 1171, 63 427 (1980). But clearly stated "granting requested.'' 364 (1996). latter statement determines outcome case. complaint relief: 16 "1.That aside [the] benefits; 17 "2.In back Secretary proper evaluation hearing de novo. '' 37. 18 context clear perspective, second "alternative,'' delay risk, half loaf. Thus, gives petitioner requested; insofar denies sought. Indeed, contrary deny seek (instead remand) through cross-appeal every do. See supra, 619, 2660-2661. 19 points many find roughly comparable circumstances. Brief 21, Gargoyles, Inc. States, 1572 (C.A.Fed.1997) (permitting recovered reasonable royalty lost profits); Castle Rubin, 78 654 (C.A.D.C.1996) (per curiam) awarded partial pay reinstatement front pay); La Plante American Honda Motor 27 731 (C.A.1 1994) compensatory punitive damages); Graziano Harrison, 950 F.2d (C.A.3 1991) damages fees); Ragen Kearney Trecker Corp., 912 619 1990) consequential Carrigan Exxon U.S.A., 877 1237 (C.A.5 1989) injunctive relief)). amicus, diligent efforts, arose less closely analogous persuade Amicus Curiae Support Judgment Below 13; see, e.g., Parr 351 513, 518, 76 912, 916, 1377 (1956) (order Government's motion dismiss indictment prejudice defendant dismissal "final'') added); CH2M Hill Central, Herman, 131 1244, 1246-1247 (C.A.7 1997) (claimant panel hearing, type reviewable statute); Director, Office Workers' Compensation Programs Bath Iron Works 853 11, 1988) (same); Stripe-A-Zone Occupational Safety Review Comm'rs, 643 230, 233 1981) 21 Finally, recognize expressed concern General, noting reviewed nearly 10,000 1996, says " [p]ractical [c]onsequences'' [a]re limited.'' 26; Reply 17, 13. Except unusual cases, believes, obtaining prefer rather immediately outright reversal-because delay, chance small, (if provokes government cross-appeal) risks losing all. 26-29. 22 Regardless, noted congressional governing appealability proceed defining "classes'' here redefine, subdivide, classes, according they believe, particular case, obviate if legislative nature. 23 For reasons, reversed, consistent opinion. 24 ordered. syllabus constitutes prepared Reporter Decisions convenience reader. Detroit Timber Lumber 200 321, 337, 26 282, 287, 50 499 (1906).

Category: 8