Hoagland v. Commissioner of Social Security

Filing 5

ORDER DISMISSING COMPLAINT for Failure to State a Claim, WITH LEAVE TO AMEND Within Thirty Days,, signed by Magistrate Judge Sandra M. Snyder on 6/27/2012. (Marrujo, C)

1
2
3
4
5

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

6
EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
7
8

DANIEL HOAGLAND,

9

Plaintiff,

10
11

CASE NO. 1:12-cv-00973-SMS
ORDER DISMISSING COMPLAINT FOR
FAILURE TO STATE A CLAIM, WITH
LEAVE TO AMEND WITHIN THIRTY DAYS

v.
MICHAEL J. ASTRUE,
Commissioner of Social Security,

12
Defendant.
13

(Doc. 2)
/

14
Screening Order
15
“Notwithstanding any filing fee, or any portion thereof, that may have been paid, the
16
Court shall dismiss the case at any time if the Court determines that . . . the action or appeal . . .
17
fails to state a claim upon which relief may be granted.” 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B)(ii).
18
Plaintiff Daniel Hoagland, proceeding in forma pauperis, by his attorneys, Law Offices of
19
Rohlfing & Kalagian, LLP, filed his complaint on June 15, 2012. Because Plaintiff’s complaint
20
fails to state a claim upon which relief can be granted, 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B)(ii) requires this
21
Court to dismiss it.
22
I.

Screening Requirement

23
The statutory privilege of proceeding in forma pauperis is a privilege, not a right.
24
25

Williams v. Field, 394 F.2d 329, 332 (9th Cir.), cert. denied, 393 U.S. 891 (1968); Smart v.
Heinze, 347 F.2d 114, 116 (9th Cir.), cert. denied, (1965). “Indigence does not create a

26
constitutional right to the expenditure of public funds and the valuable time of the courts in order
27
to prosecute an action which is totally without merit.” Phillips v. Mashburn, 746 F.2d 782, 785
28
///
1

1

(11th Cir. 1984). Accordingly, the statute requires the Court to screen any case in which a

2

plaintiff proceeds in forma pauperis, as provided in 28 U.S.C. § 1915. Screening is required

3

even if the plaintiff pursues an appeal of right, such as an appeal of the Commissioner’s denial of

4

social security disability benefits. See, e.g., 42 U.S.C. § 405(g) (establishing conditions under

5

which a claimant of social security benefits may seek judicial review of the Commissioner’s

6

determination). A court must dismiss any case, regardless of the fee paid, if the action or appeal

7

is (1) frivolous or malicious; (2) fails to state a claim on which relief may be granted; or (3) seeks

8

monetary relief from a defendant who is immune from such relief. 28 U.S.C. § 1915 (e)(2)(B).

9

II.

10

Cognizable Claim
In determining whether a complaint fails to state a cognizable claim, a court applies

11

substantially the same standard applied in motions to dismiss pursuant to F.R.Civ.P. 12(b)(6).

12

Gutierrez v. Astrue, 2011 WL 1087261 at *1 (E.D.Cal. March 23, 2011) (No. 1:11-cv-00454-

13

GSA). “The focus of any Rule 12(b)(6) dismissal . . . . is the complaint.” Schneider v.

14

California Department of Corrections, 151 F.3d 1194, 1197 n. 1 (9th Cir. 1998). A court must

15

dismiss a complaint, or portion of a complaint, for failure to state a claim upon which relief can

16

be granted if it appears beyond doubt that the plaintiff can prove no set of facts in support of his

17

or her claim(s) that would entitled the plaintiff to relief. Hishon v. King & Spalding, 467 U.S.

18

69, 73 (1984). When a court reviews a complaint under this standard, it must accept as true the

19

complaint’s allegations (Hospital Bldg. Co. v. Trustees of Rex Hospital, 425 U.S. 738, 740

20

(1976)), construe the pleadings in the light most favorable to the plaintiff (Resnick v. Hayes, 213

21

F.3d 443, 447 (9th Cir. 2000)), and resolve all doubts in the plaintiff’s favor (Jenkins v.

22

McKeithen, 395 U.S. 411, 421 (1969)).

23

A.

24

The sufficiency of a complaint is first determined by referring to F.R.Civ.P. 8(a) which

25

requires that a civil complaint contain:

26

(1)

27
28

Short and Plain Statement

a short and plain statement of the grounds for the court’s jurisdiction,
unless the court already has jurisdiction and the claim needs no new
jurisdictional support;

///
2

1

(2)

a short and plain statement of the claim showing the pleader is entitled to
relief; and

(3)

a demand for the relief sought which may include relief in the alternative
or different types of relief.

2
3
4

“Rule 8(a)’s simplified pleading standard applies to all civil actions, with limited

5

exceptions.” Swierkiewicz v. Sorema N. A., 534 U.S. 506, 512 (2002). A complaint appealing

6

the Commissioner’s decision denying social security disability benefits is not exempt from the

7

general rules of civil pleading. “While [42 U.S.C.] § 405(g) does not require that a complaint

8

spell out the basis upon which relief might be granted, Rule 8(a) requires a civil plaintiff to assert

9

the basis upon which he grounds his claim.” Brown v. Astrue, 2011 WL 3664429 at *2 (D. N.H.

10

August 19, 2011) (No. 11-cv-056-JL). The complaint must “must simply give the defendant fair

11

notice of what the plaintiff’s claim is and the grounds upon which it rests.” Swierkiewicz, 534

12

U.S. at 512. In preparing his amended complaint, Plaintiff should state specifically why the facts

13

of his situation did not support those of the ALJ’s legal conclusions that he contends where not

14

supported by substantial evidence.

15
16
17

B.

Principles of Pleading
1.

Factual Allegations and Legal Conclusions

Determining a complaint’s sufficiency invokes two underlying principles of pleading.

18

Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 556 U.S. 662, 678-79 (2009); Bell Atlantic Corp. v. Twombly, 550 U.S. 544,

19

555 (2007). First, the Court must accept as true the well-pleaded factual allegations of the

20

complaint. Twombly, 550 U.S. at 555. Detailed factual allegations are not required, but

21

“[t]hreadbare recitals of the elements of the cause of action, supported by mere conclusory

22

statements, do not suffice.” Iqbal, 556 U.S. at 678. “Plaintiff must set forth sufficient factual

23

matter accepted as true, to ‘state a claim that is plausible on its face.’” Iqbal, 129 S.Ct. at 1949,

24

quoting Twombly, 550 U.S. at 555.

25

Although accepted as true, “[f]actual allegations must be [sufficient] to raise a right to

26

relief above the speculative level.” Twombly, 550 U.S. at 555 (citations omitted). A plaintiff

27

must set forth “the grounds of his entitlement to relief,” which “requires more than labels and

28

conclusions, and a formulaic recitation of the elements of a cause of action.” Id. at 555-56
3

1

(internal quotation marks and citations omitted). A complaint appealing the Commissioner’s

2

denial of disability benefits must set forth a brief statement of facts setting forth the reasons why

3

the Commissioner’s decision was wrong. Brown, 2011 WL 3664429 at *3. See also

4

Demetriades v. Astrue, 2011 WL 4079054 (W.D.Va. September 13, 2011) (No. 7:11-cv-00407)

5

(dismissing case without prejudice for failure to state a plausible claim for relief as a result of

6

insufficient factual allegations); Ormsby v. Astrue, 2011 WL 3625101 at * 2, adopted by 2011

7

WL 3625095 (M.D. Fla. August 4, 2011) (No. 6:11-cv-1262-ORL-22) (dismissing cursory

8

complaint which alleged insufficient facts to state a cognizable claim).

9

While factual allegations are accepted as true, legal conclusions are not. Iqbal, 556 U.S.

10

at 678. A court is “not bound to accept as true a legal conclusion couched as a factual

11

allegation.” Id. “Nor is the court required to accept as true allegations that are merely

12

conclusory, unwarranted deductions of fact, or unreasonable inferences.” Sprewell v. Golden

13

State Warriors, 266 F.3d 979, 988 (9th Cir. 2001).

14

A legal conclusion is a statement such as, “ Plaintiff is unable to engage in substantial

15

gainful activity because of a medically determinable physical or mental impairment which has

16

lasted or can be expected to last for a continuous period of not less than twelve months.” Facts

17

include such allegations as “Plaintiff has severe arthritis, peripheral neuropathy, and

18

fibromyalgia”; “Plaintiff worked as auto mechanic until June 1, 1990"; and “Plaintiff was fired

19

from her job when she became unable to grasp her tools.”

20
21

2.

Plausible Claim for Relief

The second underlying principle is that “only a complaint that states a plausible claim for

22

relief survives a motion to dismiss.” Iqbal, 556 U.S. at 679. To permit the Court to determine

23

that a complaint states a plausible claim for relief, based on the reviewing court’s judicial

24

experience and common sense, the well-pleaded facts must permit the court “to infer more than a

25

mere possibility . . . . ‘that the pleader is entitled to relief.’” Id., quoting F.R.Civ.P. 8(a)(2). The

26

Supreme Court explained:

27
28

In keeping with these principles a court considering a motion to dismiss can
choose to begin by identifying pleadings that, because they are no more than
conclusions, are not entitled to the assumption of truth. While legal conclusions
4

1

can provide the framework of a complaint, they must be supported by factual
allegations. When there are well-pleaded factual allegations, a court should
assume their veracity and then determine whether they plausibly give rise to an
entitlement to relief.

2
3

Iqbal, 556 U.S. at 679.
4
See also Cook v. Astrue, 2012 WL 812380 at *2 (E.D.Cal. March 9, 2012) (No. 1:12-cv5
00347-GSA) (construing that the facts alleged in the complaint related to two legal conclusions);
6
Sanchez v. Astrue, 2011 WL 1549307 (E.D. Cal. April 21, 2011) (No. 1:11-cv-00607-GSA).
7
This means that the Court cannot accept a legal conclusions set forth in a complaint if the
8
plaintiff has not supported his or her contentions with facts. For example, if a plaintiff alleges
9
only that he or she is not capable of performing past work without setting forth facts that prove
10
that he or she cannot do that work, the Court cannot assume that the contention is true.
11
III.

Conclusion and Order

12
In rejecting Brown’s complaint appealing the Commissioner’s denying him benefits, the
13
Court observed, “”The complaint’s sole assertion of a basis for relief is that Brown feels the SSA
14
decision was wrong.” Brown, 2011 WL 3664429 at *2. Every plaintiff appealing an adverse
15
decision of the Commissioner believes that the Commissioner was wrong. The purpose of the
16
complaint is to briefly and plainly allege facts supporting the legal conclusion that the
17
Commissioner’s decision was wrong. Id. at *3. Plaintiff’s amended complaint should do so.
18
Because the complaint fails to allege facts sufficient to state a claim upon which relief can
19
be granted, this Court will dismiss it. The Court will provide Plaintiff with an additional
20
opportunity to file an amended complaint curing the deficiencies identified by the Court in this
21
order. Plaintiff must revise his complaint to allege facts sufficient to support a cognizable claim.
22
Plaintiff may not change the nature of this suit by adding new, unrelated claims in the amended
23
complaint. George v. Smith, 507 F.3d 605, 607 (7th Cir. 2007).
24
Plaintiff’s amended complaint should be brief, but must allege sufficient facts to establish
25
his cause of action. Fed. R. Civ. P. 8(a). Plaintiff should focus on setting forth, as briefly but
26
specifically as possible, the facts necessary to state a claim on which relief may be granted.
27
///
28
5

1

Plaintiff must avoid including unnecessary language, as well as advocacy and argumentation

2

more appropriate in his opening brief, which is to be submitted later.
Plaintiff is advised that an amended complaint supercedes all prior complaints, Forsyth v.

3
4

Humana, Inc., 114 F.3d 1467, 1474 (9th Cir. 1997), aff’d, 525 U.S. 299 (1999); King v. Atiyeh,

5

814 F.2d 565, 567 (9th Cir. 1987), and must be “complete in itself without reference to the prior

6

or superceded pleading.” Local Rule 15-220. “All causes of action alleged in an original

7

complaint which are not alleged in an amended complaint are waived.” King, 814 F.2d at 567;

8

accord Forsyth, 114 F.3d at 1474.

9

Based on the foregoing, it is HEREBY ORDERED that:

10

1.

11

Plaintiff’s complaint is dismissed with leave to amend for failure to state facts
sufficient to state a claim on which relief may be granted;

12

2.

Within thirty (30) days from the date of service of this order, Plaintiff shall file

13

an amended complaint curing the deficiencies identified by the Court in this order;

14

and

15

3.

If Plaintiff fails to file an amended complaint within thirty (30) days from the

16

date of service of this order, this action will be dismissed with prejudice, pursuant

17

to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B)(ii), for failure to state a claim.

18
19

IT IS SO ORDERED.

20

Dated:
icido3

June 27, 2012

/s/ Sandra M. Snyder
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
6