Gibson v. Colvin

Filing 3

SCREENING ORDER. Plaintiff's 1 Motion/Application for Leave to Proceed in forma pauperis is Granted. Plaintiff shall not be required to pay the filing fee of $400.00. The Clerk of Court shall file the Complaint, but NOT issue Summons. The Complaint is Dismissed with leave to amend. Plaintiff has until 9/16/2016 to file an Amended Complaint. Signed by Magistrate Judge Peggy A. Leen on 9/1/2016. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - SLD)

1
2
3
4
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
5
DISTRICT OF NEVADA
6
***
7

DELORIS A. GIBSON,

Case No. 2:16-01885-GMN-PAL

8

Plaintiff,

9
10

v.

SCREENING ORDER

CAROLYN W. COLVIN, Acting
Commissioner of Social Security,

11

(IFP App – ECF No. 1)
Defendant.

12
Plaintiff Deloris A. Gibson has submitted an Application to Proceed In Forma Pauperis

13
14

(ECF No. 1) pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915 along with a Complaint (ECF No. 1-2).

This

15

Application and Complaint are referred to the undersigned pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(A)

16

and LR IB 1-3 of the Local Rules of Practice.

17

I.

IN FORMA PAUPERIS APPLICATION

18

Ms. Gibson’s Application includes the affidavit required by § 1915(a) showing an

19

inability to prepay fees and costs or give security for them. Accordingly, the request to proceed

20

in forma pauperis will be granted. The court will now review the Complaint.

21

II.

SCREENING THE COMPLAINT

22

After granting a request to proceed in forma pauperis, a federal court must additionally

23

screen the complaint and any amended complaints filed prior to a responsive pleading. Lopez v.

24

Smith, 203 F.3d 1122, 1129 (9th Cir. 2000) (en banc) (§ 1915(e) “applies to all in forma pauperis

25

complaints”). The simplified pleading standard set forth in Rule 8(a) of the Federal Rules of

26

Civil Procedure applies to all civil actions, with limited exceptions. Alvarez v. Hill, 518 F.3d

27

1152, 1159 (9th Cir. 2008). For purposes of 28 U.S.C. § 1915’s screening requirement, a

28

properly pled complaint must therefore provide “a short and plain statement of the claim
-1-

1

showing that the pleader is entitled to relief.” Fed. R. Civ. P. 8(a)(2); see also Bell Atlantic

2

Corp. v. Twombly, 550 U.S. 544, 555 (2007). Although Rule 8 does not require detailed factual

3

allegations, it demands “more than labels and conclusions” or a “formulaic recitation of the

4

elements of a cause of action.” Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 556 U.S. 662, 678 (2009) (citation omitted). A

5

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

6

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

7

Cir. 2011).

8

Federal courts are given the authority dismiss a case if the action is legally “frivolous or

9

malicious,” fails to state a claim upon which relief may be granted, or seeks monetary relief from

10

a defendant who is immune from such relief.

28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2).

The standard for

11

determining whether a plaintiff has failed to state a claim upon which relief can be granted under

12

§ 1915 is the same as the Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6) standard for failure to state a

13

claim. Watison v. Carter, 668 F.3d 1108, 1112 (9th Cir. 2012). Review under Rule 12(b)(6) is

14

essentially a ruling on a question of law. North Star Intern. v. Ariz. Corp. Comm’n, 720 F.2d

15

578, 580 (9th Cir. 1983). In considering whether a plaintiff states a valid claim, the court accepts

16

as true all material allegations in the complaint and construes them in the light most favorable to

17

the plaintiff. Russell v. Landrieu, 621 F.2d 1037, 1039 (9th Cir. 1980). When a court dismisses

18

a complaint pursuant to § 1915(e), a plaintiff is ordinarily given leave to amend with directions

19

as to curing its deficiencies, unless it is clear from the face of the complaint that the deficiencies

20

could not be cured by amendment. Cato v. United States, 70 F.3d 1103, 1106 (9th Cir. 1995).

21

Here, Ms. Gibson’s Complaint challenges a decision by the Social Security

22

Administration (“SSA”) denying her disability insurance benefits and supplemental security

23

income under Titles II and XVI of the Social Security Act. See Compl. (ECF No. 1-2) ¶ 1. To

24

state a valid benefits claim, a complaint must give the defendant fair notice of what the plaintiff’s

25

claim is and the grounds upon which it rests. Starr, 652 F.3d at 1216. To do so, a complaint

26

should state when and how a plaintiff exhausted her administrative remedies with the SSA and

27

the nature of her disability, including when she claims she became disabled. The complaint

28

should also contain a short and concise statement identifying the nature of the plaintiff’s
-2-

1

disagreement with the SSA’s determination and show that the plaintiff is entitled to relief.

2

Although this showing need not be made in great detail, it must be presented in sufficient detail

3

for the court to understand the disputed issues so that it can meaningfully screen the complaint.

4

See 4 Soc. Sec. Law & Prac. § 56:4 (2015).

5

A.

Exhaustion of Administrative Remedies

6

Before a plaintiff can sue the SSA in federal court, she must exhaust her administrative

7

remedies. 42 U.S.C. § 405(g); Bass v. Social Sec. Admin., 872 F.2d 832, 833 (9th Cir. 1989)

8

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

9

party to a hearing held by the Secretary, and (2) the Secretary has made a final decision on the

10

claim”). Generally, if the SSA denies a claimant’s application for disability benefits, she can

11

request reconsideration of the decision. If the claim is denied upon reconsideration, a claimant

12

may request a hearing before an Administrative Law Judge (“ALJ”). If the ALJ denies the

13

claim, a claimant may request review of the decision by the Appeals Council. If the Appeals

14

Council declines to review the ALJ’s decision, a claimant may then request review by the United

15

States District Court. See 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.981, 416.1481. A civil action for judicial review

16

must be commenced within 60 days after receipt of the Appeals Council’s notice of a final

17

decision. Id. See also 20 C.F.R. § 405.501. The SSA assumes that the notice of final decision

18

will be received within five days of the date on the notice unless shown otherwise; thus, an

19

action commenced within 65 days is presumed timely. The civil action must be filed in the

20

judicial district in which the plaintiff resides. 42 U.S.C. § 405 (g).

21

In this case, Ms. Gibson alleges that on June 6, 2016, the Appeals Council denied the

22

request for review and the ALJ’s decision became the final decision of the Commissioner. See

23

Compl. ¶ 8. Thus, it appears she has exhausted her administrative remedies. Ms. Gibson timely

24

commenced this action as the Complaint was filed on August 10, 2016, and the Complaint

25

indicates that she resides within the District of Nevada. See Compl. ¶ 1. Accordingly, Ms.

26

Gibson has satisfied these prerequisites for judicial review.

27
28
-3-

1

B.

Grounds for Ms. Gibson’s Appeal and the Nature of the Disability

2

The Complaint seeks judicial review of the Commissioner’s decision denying benefits

3

and asks the Court to reverse that decision, or alternatively, to remand this matter for a new

4

hearing. A district court can affirm, modify, reverse, or remand a decision if a plaintiff has

5

exhausted his or her administrative remedies and timely filed a civil action. However, judicial

6

review of the Commissioner’s decision to deny benefits is limited to determining: (a) whether

7

there is substantial evidence in the record as a whole to support the findings of the

8

Commissioner; and (b) whether the correct legal standards were applied. Morgan v. Comm’r

9

Soc. Sec. Admin., 169 F.3d 595, 599 (9th Cir. 1999).

10

In her Complaint, Ms. Gibson states that she is disabled based on her history of “ischemic

11

heart disease, and degenerative disc disease.” See Compl. (ECF No. 1-2) ¶ 7. As a result of

12

these medically determinable impairments, she alleges she became disabled on December 1,

13

2008. Id. Ms. Gibson contends that the Commissioner’s findings of fact and conclusions are

14

“not supported by substantial evidence” in the record and “contrary to law and regulation.” Id.

15

¶ 8. The ALJ allegedly “failed to comply with the regulations in weighing the opinion evidence

16

in this case, evaluating credibility, and supporting the finding of non-disability with substantial

17

evidence.” Id.

18

Ms. Gibson’s Complaint merely alleges that the Commissioner’s decision to deny her

19

benefits was wrong, but she fails to indicate why the decision was wrong other than by reciting

20

the general standards that govern the court’s review of the SSA’s decision. Rule 8’s pleading

21

standard requires more than a “formulaic recitation of the elements of a cause of action” and

22

more than “labels and conclusions.” Iqbal, 556 U.S. at 678. A complaint merely stating that the

23

SSA’s decision was wrong and failing to describe the underlying reasons why the decision was

24

erroneous is insufficient to satisfy Rule 8’s pleading requirement because the complaint does not

25

provide “fair notice of what the plaintiff’s claim is and the grounds upon which it rests.” Cf.

26

Starr, 652 F.3d at 1216 (addressing post-Iqbal pleading standards and holding that a complaint

27

“must contain sufficient allegations of underlying facts to give fair notice and to enable the

28
-4-

1

opposing party to defend itself effectively”). Accordingly, the Complaint fails to state a claim

2

upon which relief can be granted.

3

Based on the foregoing,

4

IT IS ORDERED:

5

1. Plaintiff Deloris A. Gibson’s Application to Proceed In Forma Pauperis (ECF No. 1)

6

is GRANTED. Ms. Gibson shall not be required to pay the filing fee of four hundred

7

dollars ($400.00).

8

2. Ms. Gibson is permitted to maintain this action to conclusion without the necessity of

9

prepayment of any additional fees or costs or the giving of a security therefor. This

10

Order granting leave to proceed in forma pauperis shall not extend to the issuance

11

and/or service of subpoenas at government expense.

12

3. The Clerk of Court shall FILE the Complaint, but SHALL NOT issue summons.

13

4. The Complaint is DISMISSED WITH LEAVE TO AMEND. Ms. Gibson shall have

14

until September 16, 2016, to file an amended complaint, if she believes she can

15

correct the noted deficiencies.

16
17
18

5. Failure to file an amended complaint in accordance with this order may result in a
recommendation to the district judge that this case be closed.
Dated this 1st day of September, 2016.

19
20

PEGGY A. LEEN
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
-5-