Evaristo v. Social Security

Filing 3

Order Denying 2 Application to Proceed without Prepayment of Fees and Affidavit and Report And Recommendations. The court recommends that the Plaintiff's Complaint be dismissed, subject to Plaintiff's ability to amend the complaint to meet the pleading requirements of Rule 8(a) and to show that he had exhausted his administrative remedies as set forth in 42 U.S.C. § 405(g). Signed by Magistrate Judge Joaquin V.E. Manibusan, Jr on 7/19/2016. (fad, )

1
2
3
4
5
6

IN THE DISTRICT COURT

7

FOR THE TERRITORY OF GUAM

8
9

PAUL OPENA EVARISTO,
Plaintiff,

10
vs.

11
12

SOCIAL SECURITY,
Defendant.

13
14

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

CIVIL CASE NO. 16-00023

ORDER
and
REPORT & RECOMMENDATION

ORDER

15
16

The court has reviewed Plaintiff’s Complaint and his request for a waiver of fees (the

17

“Application”). Based upon his Application, it appears that Plaintiff is qualified to proceed in forma

18

pauperis, without paying the necessary fees as he has stated in his Application that he has a limited

19

monthly income. However, the court orders that his Application to proceed in forma pauperis and

20

thus move forward with this case be denied since it is also recommending below that his case be

21

dismissed without prejudice.
REPORT & RECOMMENDATION

22
23

The court must subject each civil action commenced pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)1 to

24

mandatory screening, and order the dismissal of any claims it finds “frivolous, malicious, failing to

25
26
27
28

1

Under this statute, federal courts can authorize the filing of a law suit without prepayment
of fees or security by a person who submits an affidavit that includes a statement setting forth all the
person’s assets and demonstrates an inability to pay such costs or give such security. The Plaintiff’s
Application is considered the “affidavit” required under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(1).

Paul Opena Evaristo v. Social Security, Civil Case No. 16-00023
Order and Report & Recommendation

1

state a claim upon which relief may be granted, or seeking monetary relief from a defendant immune

2

from such relief.” 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B); Lopez v. Smith, 203 F.3d 1122, 1126–27 (9th Cir.

3

2000) (en banc) (stating that 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e) “not only permits but requires” the court to sua

4

sponte dismiss an in forma pauperis complaint that fails to state a claim). A complaint must meet

5

the requirements of Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 8, which mandates that a complaint include

6
7
8

(1) 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) a short and plain statement of the claim showing that 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.

9
10

Fed. R. Civ. P. 8(a).

11

A complaint “must contain sufficient allegations of underlying facts to give fair notice and

12

to enable the opposing party to defend itself effectively.” Starr v. Baca, 652 F.3d 1202, 1216 (9th

13

Cir. 2011).

14

In this case, the Plaintiff’s Complaint suggests he is challenging a decision of the

15

Commissioner of the Social Security Administration (“SSA”) regarding Disability Insurance

16

benefits. See Compl. at §II (Basis for Jurisdiction), ECF No. 1. To state a valid benefits claim, a

17

complaint must give the defendant fair notice of what the plaintiff's claim is and the grounds upon

18

which it rests.

19

Here, the Complaint does not meet the requirements of Rule 8 of the Federal Rules of Civil

20

Procedure. It does not contain a short and plain statement of the claim showing that the Plaintiff is

21

entitled to relief. In fact, Section III of the Complaint – the place in the form complaint that requests

22

the Plaintiff to provide a Statement of Claim – is left completely blank by the Plaintiff.

23

Additionally, as a prerequisite to bringing a civil action against the SSA, the Plaintiff must

24

exhaust his administrative remedies as set forth in the Social Security Act. See 42 U.S.C. § 405(g).

25

“Section 405(g) provides that a civil action may be brought only after (1) the claimant has been party

26

to a hearing held by the [Commissioner of Social Security], and (2) the [Commissioner of Social

27

Security] has made a final decision on the claim.” Bass v. Social Sec. Admin., 872 F.2d 832, 833

28

(9th Cir. 1989). What constitutes a “final decision” is defined through agency regulations rather

Paul Opena Evaristo v. Social Security, Civil Case No. 16-00023
Order and Report & Recommendation

1

than statutory text. See 42 U.S.C. § 405(a). Generally, if the SSA denies an application for disability

2

benefits, the claimant can request reconsideration of the decision. 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.900(a)(2),

3

404.907-404.909 and 404.920. If the claim is denied upon reconsideration, a claimant may request

4

a hearing before an Administrative Law Judge (“ALJ”). See 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.900(a)(3), 404.930

5

and 404.933. If the ALJ denies the claim, a claimant may request review of the decision by the

6

Appeals Council. See 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.900(a)(4) and 404.955. If the Appeals Council declines to

7

review the ALJ’s decision, the ALJ’s ruling will stand as the final decision, and a claimant may then

8

request review by the United States District Court. See 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.900(a)(5) and 404.981.

9

In this case, the Plaintiff has not alleged that he exhausted his administrative remedies. The

10

Complaint herein claims that the decision of the Commissioner became final on January 27, 2016.

11

See Compl. at §II (Basis for Jurisdiction), ECF No. 1. The Plaintiff, however, failed to attach a copy

12

of the Commissioner’s final decision. The Plaintiff has not alleged that he petitioned the Social

13

Security Appeals Council for review, nor has he alleged that the Appeals Council denied his request

14

for review. Neither has the Plaintiff attached to the Complaint a copy of the notice he received from

15

the Appeals Council that his appeal was denied. Because of these omissions, the court is unable to

16

determine whether the Complaint was timely filed.

17

Accordingly, the court recommends that the Plaintiff’s Complaint be dismissed, subject to

18

Plaintiff’s ability to amend the complaint to meet the pleading requirements of Rule 8(a) and to show

19

that he had exhausted his administrative remedies as set forth in 42 U.S.C. § 405(g).

20
21

/s/ Joaquin V.E. Manibusan, Jr.
U.S. Magistrate Judge
Dated: Jul 19, 2016

22
23
24
25
26
27
28

NOTICE
Failure to file written objections to this Report and Recommendation within
fourteen (14) days from the date of its service shall bar an aggrieved party
from attacking such Report and Recommendation before the assigned United
States District Judge. 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B).