Barkins v. Social Security Administration

Filing 11

ORDER to Submit Additional Information. Signed by Magistrate Judge Donna M. Ryu on 01/20/2012. (dmrlc1, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 1/20/2012)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

11
For the Northern District of California

United States District Court

10
ROBERT C. BARKINS,

12
13

Plaintiff,

No. C-11-06194 DMR
ORDER TO SUBMIT ADDITIONAL
INFORMATION

v.

14

SOCIAL SECURITY ADMINISTRATION,

15

Defendant.
___________________________________/

16
17

Plaintiff Robert C. Barkins filed a Complaint seeking judicial review of a final decision of

18

the Commissioner of Social Security regarding a claim for SSDI benefits by Claimant Robert

19

Barkins for a “dependent child” named Kala Bryant.

20

Plaintiff had previously filed another case in this District, Case No. 11-0203-PJH, Robert C.

21

Barkins v. Social Security, regarding dependent child benefits. That case was dismissed on

22

September 30, 2011 on the grounds that the court lacked subject matter jurisdiction because Plaintiff

23

had not exhausted his administrative remedies. On December 20, 2011, this court ordered Plaintiff

24

to file a statement with the court indicating the name of the child for whom Plaintiff sought benefits

25

in the previous case, whether the current case involves benefits for the same child as in the previous

26

case, and if so, why this case is different from the previous case. Plaintiff submitted the

27

supplemental information on January 12, 2012. [Docket No. 10.]

28

1

In Plaintiff’s January 12, 2012 submission to the court, Plaintiff included a Notice of

2

Reconsideration from the Social Security Administration dated October 25, 2011 regarding

3

Plaintiff’s claim for benefits on behalf of Kala Bryant. The notice stated that if Plaintiff disagreed

4

with the Social Security Administration’s decision on Ms. Bryant’s benefits, the next step was to

5

request a hearing before an Administrative Law Judge. It is not clear whether Plaintiff has requested

6

a hearing before an Administrative Law Judge. Accordingly, by February 8, 2012, Plaintiff is

7

ordered to file a statement with the court indicating whether he has requested a hearing from the

8

Social Security Administration regarding its decision, and if so, whether the hearing has taken place.

9

If Plaintiff has not requested such a hearing, Plaintiff shall explain why his current case should not
be dismissed because Plaintiff has failed to exhaust his administrative remedies.

Dated: January 20, 2012

15

DONNA M. RYU
M. Ryu
United States MagistrateaJudge
Donn
e

ER

H

17

Judg

18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

2

LI

16

A

14

DERED

O OR
IT IS S

R NIA

13

FO

UNIT
ED

S

IT IS SO ORDERED.

S DISTRICT
TE
C
TA

RT
U
O

12

RT

For the Northern District of California

11

NO

United States District Court

10

N

D IS T IC T
R

OF

C