Dana Alfreds v. SSA, No. 12-3199 (7th Cir. 2013)Annotate this Case
NONPRECEDENTIAL DISPOSITION To be cited only in accordance with Fed. R. App. P. 32.1 United States Court of Appeals For the Seventh Circuit Chicago, Illinois 60604 Submitted June 26, 2013* Decided August 1, 2013 Before RICHARD A. POSNER, Circuit Judge JOEL M. FLAUM, Circuit Judge JOHN DANIEL TINDER, Circuit Judge No. 12 3199 DANA B. ALFREDS, Plaintiff Appellant, v. SOCIAL SECURITY ADMINISTRATION, et al., Defendants Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Indiana, Indianapolis Division. No. 1:11 cv 1274 JMS MJD Jane E. Magnus Stinson, Judge. O R D E R Dana Alfreds appeals the dismissal, for failure to state a claim, of her complaint against the Social Security Administration and its employees. See FED. R. CIV. P. 12(b)(6). She asks for a writ of mandamus to compel the agency to investigate members of her family, an acquaintance of her husband, and her former orthodontist for causing her to * No defendant was served with process in the district court, and none has participated in this appeal. After examining Alfreds brief and the record, we have concluded that oral argument is unnecessary. Thus, the appeal is submitted on her brief and the record. See FED. R. APP. P. 34(a)(2)(C). No. 12 3199 Page 2 become disabled. Mandamus relief, however, is unavailable to compel an agency investigation unless the investigation is one of the agency s nondiscretionary duties, Deloria v. Veterans Admin., 927 F.2d 1009, 1013 14 (7th Cir. 1991); Jafree v. Barber, 689 F.2d 640, 643 (7th Cir. 1982), and Alfreds has identified no investigative duty of the SSA. Nor can the litany of additional injuries she alleges be attributed to the SSA or any of its employees. The district court correctly concluded that Alfreds has not stated a claim for relief. AFFIRMED.