that there exists good cause for failing to present this evidence earlier. “To show good cause, [the claimant] must adequately explain [his] failure to incorporate the proffered evidence into the administra tive record.” Lisa v. Secretary of HHS, 940 F.2d 40, 45 (2d Cir.1991) (citations omitted). Claimants “should not be encouraged to withhold material information from the Appeals Council in the hope that a federal district court might issue a more favorable result when the new evidence is presented to it.” Turner v. Sullivan, 1992 WL 415379, at *3 (D.Minn. Sept.28, 1992). Other courts have held that the failure to present evidence to the Appeals Council negates a finding of good cause for failure to present new evidence earlier. See Waite v. Bowen, 819 F.2d 1356, 1361 (7th Cir.1987) (<HOLDING>); Kindred v. Heckler, 595 F.Supp. 563, 567
holding that where there is no essential conflict as to the facts and the evidence the trial court was correct in refusing to submit the theory of strict liability to the jury holding defendant agreed to submit to searches as a condition of probation holding that claimant must show good cause for failure to submit evidence to alj and appeals council holding that good cause for failure to submit evidence earlier not shown where evidence available before appeals council had reviewed case and no indication that claimant insufficiently informed about proper procedure to submit supplemental pleading holding that failure to submit an element of the offense to the jury is subject to harmless error analysis