Session v. Social Security Administration, No. 3:2009cv01564 - Document 9 (N.D. Tex. 2009)

Court Description: FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS on case: Plaintiff's complaint should be summarily dismissed without prejudice for lack of subject matter. (See findings for specifics). Magistrate Judge Jeff Kaplan no longer assigned to case. (Ordered by Magistrate Judge Jeff Kaplan on 10/2/09) (jca)

Download PDF

Session v. Social Security Administration Doc. 9 TNTHE UNITED STATESDISTRICTCOURT NORTHERN DISTRICTOF TEXAS DALLAS DIVISION LaSHAUNDA SESSION Plaintiff, V S. MICHAEL J. ASTRUE, of Commissioner SocialSecuriW Defendant. $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ NO.3-09-CV-1s64-G FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATION OF THE UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE This case has been referred to the United States magistrate judge for initial screening from the district court. The findings orderof reference pursuant 28 U.S.C. $ 636(b)anda standing to and recommendationof the magistratejudge are as follow: I. This is a pro se civil action brought by LaShaundaSessionseekingjudicial review of an administrative decision denying her application for disability insurancebenefits under Title II ofthe Social Security Act,42 U.S.C. $ 401, et seq. On August 24,2009, plaintiff tendereda one-page handwritten complaint with attachmentsto the district clerk and filed an application to proceed ir that the forma pauperls. Because information provided by plaintiff in her pauper'saffidavit indicates she lacks the funds necessaryto prosecutethis case,the court granted leave to proceed informa pauperis and allowed the complaint to be filed. Written interrogatoriesthen were sentto plaintiff in order to obtain additional information about the factual basis of her suit. Plaintiffanswered the that this caseshouldbe summarily on interrogatories October l, 2009. The court now determines dismissedfor lack of subjectmatterjurisdiction. Dockets.Justia.com II. Under the Social SecurityAct: Any individual, after any final decision of the Commissioner of Social Security made after a hearing to which he was a PaW, irrespective of the amount in controversy, may obtain a review of suchdecision by a civil action commencedwithin sixty daysafter the mailing to him of notice of such decision or within such further time as the Commissionerof Social Securitymay allow. 42 U.S.C. g a05(g) (emphasis added). A "final decision" results only after the claimant has Bowen,819F.2d76,79 (5th Cir. 1987); SeeThibodequxv. remedies. her exhausted administrative a requirement, LeJeunev. Matthews, 526F.2d 950,952 (5th Cir. 1976). To satisff the exhaustion claimant must first file a claim for social securitybenefits. See20 C.F.R. $ 416.305. The agency then issues an initial determination either granting or denying the claim. See id. $$ 416.1404 to See id. $$ 416'1407to 416.1405. Next, the claimantmust file a requestfor reconsideration. a of 416.1422.The Commissioner SocialSecurityreviewsthe claim againand issues reconsidered a determination. Id. S 416j420. After obtaining an adversedeterminationon reconsideration, dissatisfiedclaimant may requestan evidentiaryhearingbefore an administrative law judge' Seeid. $$ 416.1429to 4l6.l46L If the claimantobjectsto that decision,she may appealto the Appeals a Only afterthe AppealsCouncilissues final decision to Council. Seeid. S$ 416.1467 416.1481. may the claimant seekjudicial review in federal district court. See Mamon v. Social Security * Harper 239 Administration,24F.3d (Table),1994WL 243277at 1 (5th Cir. May 19,1994),citing S.Ct.466 (1987)' v. Bowen,813F.2d737,739(5th Cir.),cert' denied,108 In her interrogatory answefs,plaintiff statesthat her claim was denied by an administrative that decisionto the law judge on February 12,2009. (SeeMag. J. Interrog.#4). Plaintiff appealed Appeals Council, but hasnot beennotified of a ruling. (SeeMag. J. Interrog.#5)' Without a final jurisdiction Rffi v. under42 U.S.C.$ 405(9).See matter agency decision, courtlackssubject this (Kaplan, (court J.) WL4449550 * I (N.D.Tex.Oct.1,2008) at 3-08-CV-0673-BD,2008 Astrue,No. jurisdictionoversocialsecurity case whereplaintiff filed suit beforeAppeals matter lackedsubject Councilissued final decision). a RECOMMENDATION Plaintiffs complaint should be summarily dismissedwithout prejudicefor lack of subject matterjurisdiction. A copy of this report and recommendation shall be served on all parties in the manner provided by law. Any party may file written objectionsto the recommendationwithin 10 daysafter being servedwith a copy. See28 U.S.C, $ 636(bxl); Fen. R. Clv. P.72(b). The failure to file written objections will bar the aggrieved parfy from appealing the factual findings and legal conclusions of the magistratejudge that are acceptedor adoptedby the district court, except upon l4l7(5th SeeDouglassv.UnitedServicesAutomobileAss'n,7gF.3d1415, groundsofplaine11or. Cir. 1996). DATED: October2.2009. LAN JUDGE MAGISTRATE STATES

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.