What legal principle causes Oscar's second SSDI application to be dismissed?

In the context of Social Security Disability Insurance (SSDI) applications, the principle of res judicata plays a crucial role when determining the outcomes of repeated applications. Res judicata, also known as claim preclusion, prohibits the relitigation of claims that have already been decided by a competent authority. In Oscar's case, if his first SSDI application was denied and he subsequently filed a second application without introducing new and material evidence demonstrating a change in his condition or circumstances, the second application could be dismissed under the principle of res judicata. This principle is intended to ensure finality in judicial decisions, preventing the same issue from being contested multiple times unnecessarily.

In this context, other principles such as good cause rulings, final determinations, and the reopening rule would not apply as directly. Good cause rulings might pertain to certain procedural exceptions, while final determinations simply refer to a decision made on a claim. The reopening rule permits some claims to be reconsidered under specific conditions, but if the criteria for res judicata are met, it would not apply to Oscar's situation. Hence, res judicata is the key legal principle responsible for dismissing his second SSDI application.