Opinion ID: 2737830
Heading Depth: 3
Heading Rank: 2

Heading: Attached Records

Text: Mr. Dumas attached medical records to his appellate briefs, some of which were dated before the ALJ’s decision and some after. A court may remand to the ALJ for additional proceedings “but only upon a showing that there is new evidence which is material and that there is good cause for the failure to incorporate such evidence into the record in a prior proceeding.” 42 U.S.C. § 405(g). “Evidence is material if the [ALJ’s] decision might reasonably have been different had the [new] evidence been before [her] when [her] decision was rendered.” Wilson v. Astrue, 602 F.3d 1136, 1148 (10th Cir. 2010) (internal quotation marks omitted). We have reviewed these medical records and conclude they would not reasonably have changed the ALJ’s decision. None “purport[s] to retroactively -6- diagnose a condition existing in the period preceding the ALJ’s decision [or] indicate[s] any impaired functioning relating back to that period,” Krauser v. Astrue, 638 F.3d 1324, 1329 (10th Cir. 2011).1 To the extent the records dated after the ALJ’s decision indicate a new condition, this evidence is “relevant only to a new application for benefits commencing after the ALJ’s decision,” id.; but see id. (directing ALJ to consider evidence developed following the agency’s decision because the case was remanded for further proceedings “in light of other error [that] extend[ed] the potential period of disability through the next date of decision”). The medical records attached to Mr. Dumas’s briefs do not warrant a remand for further consideration.