administrative or judicial action.” 20 C.F.R. § 404.957(c)(1) (2011). The Commissioner may elect to reopen a prior decision, 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.987, 988 (2011), but this decision is not reviewable. See Culbertson v. Sec’y of Health & Human Servs., 859 F.2d 319, 322 (4th Cir.1988) (“When deciding whether to reopen or to reconsider his own administrative determinations, the Secretary enjoys broad discretion, which is generally not subject to judicial review.”). Here, the Appeals Council determined that res judicata barred a finding of disability during the period at issue in Fiske’s prior disability application. The Council’s inquiry into the ALJ’s decision and evidence concerning this period does not constructively reopen the claim. See Hall v. Chater, 52 F.3d 518, 521 (4th Cir.1995) (<HOLDING>). Because the Commissioner’s decision not to
holding that additional records submitted to the appeals council are part of the administrative record for judicial review holding rule 38 applies to frivolous criminal appeals as well as civil appeals holding that res judicata applies in deportation proceedings holding that appeals council must consider evidence submitted with a request for review if it is a new b material and c related to the period on or before the date of the aljs decision holding that appeals council did not explicitly or implicitly reopen case and stating that appeals council must be afforded opportunity to look far enough into record to determine whether res judicata applies