Cleveland-Hayes v. Commissioner of Social Security
Filing
3
ORDER Granting Motion To Proceed In Forma Pauperis (Doc. 2 ), ORDER Directing Clerk To Issue Summons And New Case Documents, signed by Magistrate Judge Jennifer L. Thurston on 6/28/2013. (Fahrney, E)
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
9
EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
10
11
NAYOMY MENDOZA DE NEPITA,
12
Plaintiff,
v.
13
14
COMMISSION OF SOCIAL SECURITY,
Defendant.
15
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
Case No.: 1:13-cv-00962 - JLT
ORDER GRANTING MOTION TO PROCEED
INFORMA PAUPERIS
(Doc. 2)
ORDER DIRECTING CLERK TO ISSUE
SUMMONS AND NEW CASE DOCUMENTS
16
On June 24, 2013, Ana Cleveland-Hayes (“Plaintiff”) initiated this action by filing a complaint
17
18
for judicial review of a determination of the Social Security Administration denying her application for
19
benefits. (Doc. 1). In addition, Plaintiff filed a motion to proceed in forma pauperis. (Doc. 2). For the
20
following reasons, Plaintiff’s motion to proceed in forma pauperis is GRANTED and the Clerk is
21
DIRECTED to issue the Summons and new case documents.
22
I.
MOTION TO PROCEED IN FORMA PAUPERIS
The Court may authorize the commencement of an action without prepayment of fees “but a
23
24
person who submits an affidavit that includes a statement of all assets such person . . . possesses [and]
25
that the person is unable to pay such fees or give security therefor.” 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a). The Court
26
has reviewed the application and determined it satisfies the requirements of 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a).
27
Therefore, Plaintiff’s motion to proceed in forma pauperis is GRANTED.
28
///
1
1
II.
SCREENING REQUIREMENT
When an individual seeks to proceed in forma pauperis, the Court is required to review the
2
3
complaint and shall dismiss a complaint, or portion of the complaint, if it is “frivolous, malicious or
4
fails to state a claim upon which relief may be granted; or . . . seeks monetary relief from a defendant
5
who is immune from such relief.” 28 U.S.C. § 1915A(b); 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2). A Plaintiff’s claim
6
is frivolous “when the facts alleged rise to the level of the irrational or the wholly incredible, whether
7
or not there are judicially noticeable facts available to contradict them.” Denton v. Hernandez, 504
8
U.S. 25, 32-33 (1992).
9
III.
PLEADING STANDARDS
10
General rules for pleading complaints are governed by the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. A
11
pleading must include a statement affirming the court’s jurisdiction, “a short and plain statement of the
12
claim showing the pleader is entitled to relief; and . . . a demand for the relief sought, which may
13
include relief in the alternative or different types of relief.” Fed. R. Civ. P. 8(a).
A complaint must give fair notice and state the elements of the plaintiff’s claim in a plain and
14
15
succinct manner. Jones v. Cmty Redevelopment Agency, 733 F.2d 646, 649 (9th Cir. 1984). The
16
purpose of the complaint is to give the defendant fair notice of the claims against him, and the grounds
17
upon which the complaint stands. Swierkiewicz v. Sorema N.A., 534 U.S. 506, 512 (2002). The
18
Supreme Court noted: “A pleading that offers labels and conclusions or a formulaic recitation of the
19
elements of a cause of action will not do. Nor does a complaint suffice if it tenders naked assertions
20
devoid of further factual enhancement.” Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 556 U.S. 662, 678 (2009) (internal quotation
21
marks, citations omitted). When factual allegations are well-pled, a court should assume their truth and
22
determine whether the facts would make the plaintiff entitled to relief; conclusions in the pleading are
23
not entitled to the same assumption of truth. Id.
24
IV.
25
DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS
Here, Plaintiff’s complaint indicates her application and appeal for Social Security benefits
26
have been denied, and she seeks review of the decision by the Commissioner of Social Security
27
denying benefits. (Doc. 1 at 1-2). The Court has jurisdiction over such claims pursuant to 42 U.S.C.
28
§ 405(g), which provides in relevant part:
2
Any individual, after any final decision of the Commissioner made after a hearing to
which he was a party, irrespective of the amount in controversy, may obtain a review of
such decision by a civil action commenced within sixty days after the mailing to him of
such decision or within such further time as the Commissioner may allow. Such action
shall be brought in the district court of the United States for the judicial district in
which the plaintiff resides, or has his principal place of business . . . The court shall
have power to enter, upon the pleadings and transcript of the record, a judgment
affirming, modifying, or reversing the decision of the Commissioner of Social Security,
with or without remanding the cause for a rehearing.
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
Id. Except as provided by statute, “[n]o findings of fact or decision of the Commissioner shall be
8
reviewed by any person, tribunal, or governmental agency.” 42 U.S.C. § 405(h).
The Appeals Council denied Plaintiff’s request for review of the decision of an administrative
9
10
law judge on March 1, 2013. (Doc. 1 at 3). Plaintiff requested an extension of time to file a civil
11
action, which was granted on May 23, 2013. Id. Accordingly, Plaintiff seeks timely review of the
12
decision to deny benefits, and the Court has jurisdiction over the matter.
13
V.
14
15
CONCLUSION AND ORDER
Plaintiff’s complaint states a cognizable claim for review of the administrative decision
denying Social Security benefits. Based upon the foregoing, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED:
16
1.
Plaintiff’s motion to proceed in forma pauperis (Doc. 2) is GRANTED;
17
2.
The Clerk of Court is DIRECTED to issue summons as to the defendant, Commissioner
of Social Security;
18
19
3.
The Clerk of Court is DIRECTED to issue and serve Plaintiff with Social Security Case
20
Documents, including the Scheduling Order, Order regarding Consent, the Consent
21
Form, and USM-285 Forms; and
22
4.
Plaintiff SHALL complete and submit to the Court the “Notice of Submission of
Documents in Social Security Appeal Form.”
23
24
25
26
27
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated:
June 28, 2013
/s/ Jennifer L. Thurston
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
28
3
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
Why Is My Information Online?