Biestek v. Berryhill
Holding
A vocational expert's refusal to provide private market-survey data during a Social Security disability benefits hearing upon the applicant's request does not categorically preclude the testimony from counting as "substantial evidence" in federal court under 42 U.S.C. § 405(g).
Judgment
Affirmed, 6-3, in an opinion by Elena Kagan on Apr 1, 2019. Justice Sotomayor filed a dissenting opinion. Justice Gorsuch filed a dissenting opinion, in which Justice Ginsburg joined.
Feb 21, 2018Petition for a writ of certiorari filed. (Response due March 26, 2018)
Feb 21, 2018Pursuant to Rule 34.6 and Paragraph 9 of the Guidelines for the Submission of Documents to the Supreme Court’s Electronic Filing System, filings in this case should be submitted in paper form only, and should not be submitted through the Court’s electronic filing system.
Mar 20, 2018Motion to extend the time to file a response from March 26, 2018 to April 25, 2018, submitted to The Clerk.
Mar 21, 2018Motion to extend the time to file a response is granted and the time is extended to and including April 25, 2018.
Apr 20, 2018Motion to extend the time to file a response from April 25, 2018 to May 14, 2018, submitted to The Clerk.
Apr 20, 2018Motion to extend the time to file a response is granted and the time is further extended to and including May 14, 2018.
May 14, 2018Brief of respondent Nancy A. Berryhill, Deputy Commissioner for Operations, Social Security Administration in opposition filed.May 21, 2018Reply of petitioner Michael J. Biestek filed.May 22, 2018DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 6/7/2018.
Jun 11, 2018DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 6/14/2018.
Jun 18, 2018DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 6/21/2018.
Jun 25, 2018Petition GRANTED.
Jun 25, 2018As Rule 34.6 provides, “If the Court schedules briefing and oral argument in a case that was governed by Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 5.2(c) or Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 49.1(c), the parties shall submit electronic versions of all prior and subsequent filings with this Court in the case, subject to [applicable] redaction rules.” Subsequent party and amicus filings in the case should now be submitted through the Court’s electronic filing system, with any necessary redactions.
Jul 13, 2018Joint motion for an extension of time to file the opening briefs on the merits filed.Jul 13, 2018Joint motion to extend the time to file the opening briefs on the merits granted. The time to file the joint appendix and petitioner's brief on the merits is extended to and including August 27, 2018. The time to file respondent's brief on the merits is extended to and including October 15, 2018.
Aug 3, 2018Blanket Consent filed by Petitioner, Michael J. BiestekAug 3, 2018Motion to dispense with printing the joint appendix filed by petitioner Michael J. Biestek.Aug 27, 2018Brief of petitioner Michael J. Biestek filed.Sep 4, 2018Brief amicus curiae of National Association of Disability Representatives filed.Sep 4, 2018Brief amici curiae of National Organization of Social Security Claimants' Representatives, et al. filed.Oct 1, 2018Motion to dispense with printing the joint appendix filed by petitioner GRANTED.
Oct 9, 2018SET FOR ARGUMENT on Tuesday, December 4, 2018
Oct 15, 2018Record received from the U.S.C.A. 6th Circuit.
Oct 15, 2018Brief of Nancy A. Berryhill, Deputy Commissioner for Operations, Social Security Administration not accepted for filing. (Revised brief submitted - 10/16/18)
Oct 15, 2018Brief of respondent Nancy A. Berryhill, Deputy Commissioner for Operations, Social Security Administration filed. (10/16/18)Oct 19, 2018CIRCULATED
Nov 14, 2018Reply of petitioner Michael J. Biestek filed. (Distributed)Dec 4, 2018Argued. For petitioner: Ishan Bhabha, Washington, D. C. For respondent: Anthony A. Yang, Assistant to the Solicitor General, Department of Justice, Washington, D. C.
Apr 1, 2019Adjudged to be AFFIRMED. Kagan, J., delivered the opinion of the Court, in which Roberts, C. J., and Thomas, Breyer, Alito, and Kavanaugh, JJ., joined. Sotomayor, J., filed a dissenting opinion. Gorsuch, J., filed a dissenting opinion, in which Ginsburg, J., joined.
May 3, 2019JUDGMENT ISSUED.
Recommended Citation: Biestek v. Berryhill, SCOTUSblog, https://www.scotusblog.com/cases/biestek-v-berryhill/