Gural Foster v. Carolyn Colvin, No. 16-1014 (8th Cir. 2016)
Annotate this CaseCourt Description: Per Curiam - Before Loken, Bowman and Murphy, Circuit Judges] Civil case - Social Security. The district court did nor err in dismissing Foster's complaint without prejudice for failure to exhaust his administrative remedies.
Download PDF
United States Court of Appeals For the Eighth Circuit ___________________________ No. 16-1014 ___________________________ Gural Foster lllllllllllllllllllll Plaintiff - Appellant v. Carolyn W. Colvin, Acting Commissioner of Social Security lllllllllllllllllllll Defendant - Appellee ____________ Appeal from United States District Court for the Eastern District of Arkansas - Little Rock ____________ Submitted: September 20, 2016 Filed: September 23, 2016 [Unpublished] ____________ Before LOKEN, BOWMAN, and MURPHY, Circuit Judges. ____________ PER CURIAM. Gural Foster appeals after the District Court1 dismissed his amended complaint apparently challenging the discontinuation of Supplemental Security Income payments. The complaint was dismissed without prejudice based on Foster’s failure to exhaust his administrative remedies. Upon de novo review, we conclude that the dismissal was proper. See 42 U.S.C. § 405(g) (providing for judicial review of final decisions of the Commissioner of Social Security); Schoolcraft v. Sullivan, 971 F.2d 81, 84–85 (8th Cir. 1992) (“In order for the district court to have subject matter jurisdiction under section 405(g), a claimant must have presented a claim for benefits to the Secretary and exhausted the administrative remedies prescribed by the Secretary.” (footnote omitted)), cert. denied, 510 U.S. 1081 (1994); see also Sipp v. Astrue, 641 F.3d 975, 979 (8th Cir. 2011) (standard of review). Accordingly, we affirm. ______________________________ 1 The Honorable D.P. Marshall Jr., United States District Judge for the Eastern District of Arkansas, adopting the report and recommendations of the Honorable J. Thomas Ray, United States Magistrate Judge for the Eastern District of Arkansas. -2-
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
