Filed: Feb. 08, 2016
Latest Update: Feb. 08, 2016
Summary: ORDER DISMISSING FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT WITH LEAVE TO AMEND JENNIFER L. THURSTON , Magistrate Judge . Plaintiff Darren Hugh Greer is proceeding in forma pauperis with an action for judicial review of the decision to deny his application for Social Security benefits. On February 3, 2016, Plaintiff filed his First Amended Complaint. (Doc. 5) Because the facts alleged are insufficient for the Court to determine whether this action was timely filed, the First Amended Complaint is DISMISSED
Summary: ORDER DISMISSING FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT WITH LEAVE TO AMEND JENNIFER L. THURSTON , Magistrate Judge . Plaintiff Darren Hugh Greer is proceeding in forma pauperis with an action for judicial review of the decision to deny his application for Social Security benefits. On February 3, 2016, Plaintiff filed his First Amended Complaint. (Doc. 5) Because the facts alleged are insufficient for the Court to determine whether this action was timely filed, the First Amended Complaint is DISMISSED ..
More
ORDER DISMISSING FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT WITH LEAVE TO AMEND
JENNIFER L. THURSTON, Magistrate Judge.
Plaintiff Darren Hugh Greer is proceeding in forma pauperis with an action for judicial review of the decision to deny his application for Social Security benefits. On February 3, 2016, Plaintiff filed his First Amended Complaint. (Doc. 5) Because the facts alleged are insufficient for the Court to determine whether this action was timely filed, the First Amended Complaint is DISMISSED with leave to amend.
I. Screening Requirement
When a plaintiff proceeds in forma pauperis, the Court is required to review the complaint, and shall dismiss the case at any time if the Court determines that the action is "frivolous, malicious or fails to state a claim on which relief may be granted; or . . . seeks monetary relief against a defendant who is immune from such relief." 28 U.S.C. 1915(e)(2). The Court must screen the First Amended Complaint because an amended complaint supersedes the previously filed complaint. See Forsyth v. Humana, Inc., 114 F.3d 1467, 1474 (9th Cir. 1997); King v. Atiyeh, 814 F.2d 565, 567 (9th Cir. 1987).
II. Pleading Standards
General rules for pleading complaints are governed by the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. A pleading must include a statement affirming the court's jurisdiction, "a short and plain statement of the claim showing the pleader is entitled to relief; and . . . a demand for the relief sought, which may include relief in the alternative or different types of relief." Fed. R. Civ. P. 8(a).
A complaint must give fair notice and state the elements of the plaintiff's claim in a plain and succinct manner. Jones v. Cmty Redevelopment Agency, 733 F.2d 646, 649 (9th Cir. 1984). The purpose of the complaint is to give the defendant fair notice of the claims against him, and the grounds upon which the complaint stands. Swierkiewicz v. Sorema N.A., 534 U.S. 506, 512 (2002). The Supreme Court noted,
Rule 8 does not require detailed factual allegations, but it demands more than an unadorned, the-defendant-unlawfully-harmed-me accusation. A pleading that offers labels and conclusions or a formulaic recitation of the elements of a cause of action will not do. Nor does a complaint suffice if it tenders naked assertions devoid of further factual enhancement.
Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 556 U.S. 662, 678-79 (2009) (internal quotation marks and citations omitted). Vague and conclusory allegations do not support a cause of action. Ivey v. Board of Regents, 673 F.2d 266, 268 (9th Cir. 1982). The Court clarified further,
[A] complaint must contain sufficient factual matter, accepted as true, to "state a claim to relief that is plausible on its face." [Citation]. A claim has facial plausibility when the plaintiff pleads factual content that allows the court to draw the reasonable inference that the defendant is liable for the misconduct alleged. [Citation]. The plausibility standard is not akin to a "probability requirement," but it asks for more than a sheer possibility that a defendant has acted unlawfully. [Citation]. Where a complaint pleads facts that are "merely consistent with" a defendant's liability, it "stops short of the line between possibility and plausibility of `entitlement to relief.
Iqbal, 556 U.S. at 679 (citations omitted). When factual allegations are well-pled, a court should assume their truth and determine whether the facts would make the plaintiff entitled to relief; legal conclusions are not entitled to the same assumption of truth. Id. The Court may grant leave to amend a complaint to the extent deficiencies of the complaint can be cured by an amendment. Lopez v. Smith, 203 F.3d 1122, 1127-28 (9th Cir. 2000) (en banc).
III. Discussion and Analysis
Plaintiff requests that the Court "review a decision by the Commissioner of the Social Security Administration denying Plaintiff's applications for Social Security Disability Insurance benefits and Supplemental Security Income payments." (Doc. 5 at 1) The Court may jurisdiction pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 405(g), which provides in relevant part:
Any individual, after any final decision of the Commissioner made after a hearing to which he was a party, irrespective of the amount in controversy, may obtain a review of such decision by a civil action commenced within sixty days after the mailing to him of such decision or within such further time as the Commissioner may allow. Such action shall be brought in the district court of the United States for the judicial district in which the plaintiff resides, or has his principal place of business . . . The court shall have power to enter, upon the pleadings and transcript of the record, a judgment affirming, modifying, or reversing the decision of the Commissioner of Social Security, with or without remanding the cause for a rehearing.
Id. (emphasis added). Except as provided by statute, "[n]o findings of fact or decision of the Commissioner shall be reviewed by any person, tribunal, or governmental agency." 42 U.S.C. § 405(h). These regulations "operate as a statute of limitations setting the time period in which a claimant may appeal a final decision of the Commissioner." Berrigan v. Astrue, 2010 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 115390, at *4-5 (E.D. Cal. Oct. 29, 2010) (citing Bowen v. City of New York, 476 U.S. 467, 479 (1986); Matthews v. Eldridge, 424 U.S. 319, 328 n. 9 (1976)). The time limit is a condition on the waiver of sovereign immunity, and it must be strictly construed. Id.
Here, Plaintiff alleges the administrative law judge issued a decision on January 15, 2014, and the Appeals Council denied his request for review of the decision on March 19, 2015. (Doc. 5 at 2) Plaintiff alleges he requested an extension of time to file an action, which was granted by the Appeals Council on December 10, 2015. (Id.) However, Plaintiff fails to allege the duration of the extension, or the number of days he had to file the action. Without such information, the Court is unable to determine whether the action is timely, or whether the Court has jurisdiction over the matter pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 405(g).
IV. Leave to Amend the Complaint
Leave to amend should be granted to the extent that the deficiencies of the complaint can be cured by amendment. Lopez v. Smith, 203 F.3d 1122, 1130 (9th Cir. 2000) (en banc). Here, Plaintiff may be able to allege facts supporting a finding that the Court has jurisdiction over the matter. The Court will grant Plaintiff leave to amend the complaint to cure the factual deficiencies of this complaint by stating the necessary information, including the duration of the extension granted by the Appeals Council.
The amended complaint must bear the docket number assigned this case and must be labeled "Second Amended Complaint."
Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED:
1. Plaintiff's First Amended Complaint IS DISMISSED with leave to amend; and
2. Plaintiff is GRANTED 21 days from the date of service of this order to file a Second Amended Complaint that complies with the requirements of the pertinent substantive law, the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, and the Local Rules of Practice.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
