Tina C. v. Saul, 2:15-CV-322-DBH. (2019)
Court: District Court, D. Maine
Number: infdco20191018b13
Visitors: 11
Filed: Oct. 16, 2019
Latest Update: Oct. 16, 2019
Summary: ORDER ON PLAINTIFF'S MOTION TO RE-OPEN CASE D. BROCK HORNBY , District Judge . This pro se plaintiff has moved to reopen her previous social security disability benefits case, Civil No. 2:15-cv-322, which was closed in 2017. The plaintiff has apparently received a new negative decision from an Administrative Law Judge and the Appeals Council. The plaintiff's motion to reopen is DENIED because this Court has no authority to reopen this case. The Commissioner's response to the plaintiff'
Summary: ORDER ON PLAINTIFF'S MOTION TO RE-OPEN CASE D. BROCK HORNBY , District Judge . This pro se plaintiff has moved to reopen her previous social security disability benefits case, Civil No. 2:15-cv-322, which was closed in 2017. The plaintiff has apparently received a new negative decision from an Administrative Law Judge and the Appeals Council. The plaintiff's motion to reopen is DENIED because this Court has no authority to reopen this case. The Commissioner's response to the plaintiff's..
More
ORDER ON PLAINTIFF'S MOTION TO RE-OPEN CASE
D. BROCK HORNBY, District Judge.
This pro se plaintiff has moved to reopen her previous social security disability benefits case, Civil No. 2:15-cv-322, which was closed in 2017. The plaintiff has apparently received a new negative decision from an Administrative Law Judge and the Appeals Council.
The plaintiff's motion to reopen is DENIED because this Court has no authority to reopen this case. The Commissioner's response to the plaintiff's motion (ECF No. 25) explains why this Court has no authority to reopen her previous case. Instead, the plaintiff must file a new Complaint to challenge the new negative decision. Since the time may have already passed for filing a new Complaint, the Commissioner has also suggested options that may be open to the plaintiff to seek relief from the time limits so that she can challenge the new decision.
The motion is therefore DENIED, but WITHOUT PREJUDICE to other steps the plaintiff may take to pursue her challenge.
SO ORDERED.
Source: Leagle
