Brown v. O'Malley

1

2

3

4 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

5 NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

6 SAN FRANCISCO DIVISION

7

8 D.B.,1

Case No. 24-cv-00295-PHK

9 Plaintiff,

ORDER RE: MANDATORY

10 v. SCREENING OF COMPLAINT

PURSUANT TO 28 U.S.C.

11 MARTIN J. O'MALLEY, § 1915(e)(2)(B)

12 Defendant. Re: Dkt. No. 1

13

14 Plaintiff D.B. (“Plaintiff”) brings this action under the Social Security Act, 42 U.S.C.

15 § 405(g), seeking judicial review of a final decision by the Commissioner of the Social Security

16 Administration, Defendant Martin O’Malley (“Commissioner”), denying Plaintiff’s application for

17 supplemental security income. [Dkt. 1]. The Court previously granted Plaintiff’s application to

18 proceed in forma pauperis (“IFP”), in accordance with 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a). [Dkt. 5]. The Court

19 now undertakes a determination of whether Plaintiff’s Complaint must be dismissed pursuant to

20 the requirements of § 1915(e)(2)(B).

21 Any complaint filed pursuant to the IFP provisions of § 1915(a) is subject to mandatory

22 review by the Court and sua sponte dismissal if the Court determines the complaint is “frivolous

23 or malicious,” “fails to state a claim on which relief may be granted,” or “seeks monetary relief

24 against a defendant who is immune from such relief.” 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B)(i)-(iii).

25 Complaints in social security cases are not exempt from this screening requirement. See Calhoun

26

1 In actions involving requested review of a decision by the Commissioner of the Social Security

27

Administration, the Court generally uses the first name and initial of last name (or just the initials)

1 v. Stahl, 254 F.3d 845, 845 (9th Cir. 2001) (“[T]he provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B) are not

2 limited to prisoners.”); see also Hoagland v. Astrue, No. 1:12-cv-00973-SMS, 2012 WL 2521753,

3 at *1 (E.D. Cal. June 28, 2012)) (“Screening is required even if the plaintiff pursues an appeal of

4 right, such as an appeal of the Commissioner’s denial of social security disability benefits.”).

5 As an initial matter, the Court finds that the instant Complaint does not “seek[] monetary

6 relief against a defendant who is immune from such relief.” 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B)(iii). First,

7 the Complaint does not seek monetary relief in the form of damages from the Commissioner, but

8 rather seeks a Judgment and Order reversing the Commissioner’s decision on the benefits at issue.

9 [Dkt. 1]. Second, the Commissioner is not immune from the relief requested. To the contrary, the

10 Social Security Act expressly authorizes federal judicial review of “any final decision of the

11 Commissioner of Social Security made after a hearing to which [the plaintiff] was a party.” 42

12 U.S.C. § 405(g).

13 As in most social security cases, the substantive bulk of the § 1915(e)(2)(B) screening

14 determination focuses on whether the Complaint “fails to state a claim on which relief may be

15 granted.” 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B)(ii). Determining whether a complaint satisfies this

16 requirement is “a context-specific task that requires the reviewing court to draw on its judicial

17 experience and common sense.” Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 556 U.S. 662, 679 (2009) (citation omitted).

18 The context here is guided by the fact that this is a social security disability appeal brought by an

19 indigent plaintiff. “Although a complaint in a social security disability appeal may differ in some

20 ways from complaints in other civil cases, it is ‘not exempt from the general rules of civil

21 pleading.’” Lynnmarie E. v. Saul, No. 21-cv-00244-JLB, 2021 WL 2184828, at *2 (S.D. Cal. May

22 28, 2021) (quoting Hoagland, 2012 WL 2521753, at *2).

23 In reviewing a complaint for these purposes, “[t]he standard for determining whether a

24 plaintiff has failed to state a claim upon which relief may be granted under § 1915(e)(2)(B)(ii) is

25 the same as the Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6) standard for failure to state a claim.”

26 Watison v. Carter, 668 F.3d 1108, 1112 (9th Cir. 2012) (citing Lopez v. Smith, 203 F.3d 1122,

27 1127 (9th Cir. 2000)). A Rule 12(b)(6) motion to dismiss tests whether a claim satisfies the

1 1241-42 (9th Cir. 2011) (quoting Navarro v. Block, 250 F.3d 729, 732 (9th Cir. 2001)) (“A motion

2 to dismiss under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6) for failure to state a claim upon which

3 relief can be granted ‘tests the legal sufficiency of a claim.’”).

4 The requisite minimum pleading standard varies depending on the type of claim(s) at issue.

5 Iqbal, 556 U.S. at 679. The currently applicable minimum pleading standard for social security

6 complaints is set forth in the Supplemental Rules for Social Security Actions Under 42 U.S.C.

7 § 405(g). See Giselle N. v. Kijakazi, --- F. Supp. 3d ----, 2023 WL 6307947, at *3 (N.D. Cal.

8 2023). Under Supplemental Rule 2(b)(1), “[t]he complaint must: (A) state that the action is

9 brought under § 405(g); (B) identify the final decision to be reviewed, including any identifying

10 designation provided by the Commissioner with the final decision; (C) state the name and the

11 county of residence of the person for whom benefits are claimed; (D) name the person on whose

12 wage record benefits are claimed; and (E) state the type of benefits claimed.” Fed. R. Civ. P.

13 Supp. Soc. Sec. R. 2(b)(1). Additionally, Supplemental Rule 2(b)(2) provides that the complaint

14 “may include a short and plain statement of the grounds for relief.” Fed. R. Civ. P. Supp. Soc.

15 Sec. R. 2(b)(2) (emphasis added).

16 Accordingly, for purposes of § 1915(e)(2)(B)(ii), the Court must apply Supplemental Rule

17 2(b)(1) to determine whether Plaintiff’s Complaint sufficiently states a claim for relief. Giselle N.,

18 --- F. Supp. 3d ----, 2023 WL 6307947, at *3. As discussed above, Supplemental Rule 2(b)(1)

19 first requires that a social security complaint “state that the action is brought under § 405(g).”

20 Fed. R. Civ. P. Supp. Soc. Sec. R. 2(b)(1)(A). In the instant Complaint, Plaintiff states: “[T]his

21 court has jurisdiction pursuant to Title 42 U.S.C. § 405(g).” [Dkt. 1 at 2]. Accordingly, the Court

22 finds that Plaintiff’s Complaint satisfies the first pleading requirement of Supplemental Rule

23 2(b)(1).

24 Supplemental Rule 2(b)(1) next requires that a social security complaint “identify the final

25 decision to be reviewed, including any identifying designation provided by the Commissioner with

26 the final decision.” Fed. R. Civ. P. Supp. Soc. Sec. R. 2(b)(1)(B). Here, the Complaint states that

27 Plaintiff “complains of a decision which adversely affect[s] the plaintiff in whole or in part[,]” and

1 review[.]” [Dkt. 1 at 1]. The Complaint includes Plaintiff’s full name, as well as the last four

2 digits of Plaintiff’s social security number. Id. at 2. Construed according to the proper legal

3 standards, the Court finds this information in the Complaint sufficient to satisfy the second

4 requirement of Supplemental Rule 2(b)(1).

5 Supplemental Rule 2(b)(1) also requires that a social security complaint “state the name

6 and the county of residence of the person for whom benefits are claimed,” and “name the person

7 on whose wage record benefits are claimed.” Fed. R. Civ. P. Supp. Soc. Sec. R. 2(b)(1)(C). As

8 already noted, the Complaint here includes Plaintiff’s full name. The Complaint states that

9 Plaintiff is a resident of San Francisco, California. [Dkt. 1 at 1]. The undersigned, sitting in the

10 San Francisco Division of this Court, takes judicial notice that San Francisco, California is

11 coextensive with San Francisco County. See Muckleshoot Tribe v. Lummi Indian Tribe, 141 F.3d

12 1355, 1358 n.4 (9th Cir. 1998) (“The court may take judicial notice of undisputed geographical

13 facts.”); see, e.g., Windom-Mattox v. City of Vacaville, No. C 96-3087 VRW, 1996 WL 557748, at

14 *1 (N.D. Cal. Sept. 26, 1996) (“The court takes judicial notice that the City of Vacaville is located

15 in Solano County.”). The Complaint identifies Plaintiff as the individual on whose wage record

16 benefits are claimed. [Dkt. 1 at 2]. Accordingly, the Court finds that Plaintiff’s Complaint

17 satisfies the third and fourth requirements of Supplemental Rule 2(b)(1).

18 Finally, Supplemental Rule 2(b)(1) requires that a social security complaint “state the type

19 of benefits claimed.” Fed. R. Civ. P. Supp. Soc. Sec. R. 2(b)(1)(E). Here, Plaintiff’s Complaint

20 identifies the type of benefits at issue as “Supplemental Security Income.” [Dkt. 1 at 2].

21 Accordingly, the Court finds that Plaintiff’s Complaint satisfies the final pleading requirement of

22 Supplemental Rule 2(b)(1).

23 For the foregoing reasons, the Court finds that Plaintiff’s Complaint satisfies the minimum

24 pleading requirements to state a claim for relief. 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B)(ii). For similar

25 reasons, the Court finds that Plaintiff’s Complaint is neither frivolous nor malicious. 28 U.S.C.

26 § 1915(e)(2)(B)(i).

27 Accordingly, and in light of the above analysis, the Court concludes for purposes of

] to state a claim on which relief may be granted,” and does not “seek[] monetary relief against a

2 || defendant who is immune from such relief.” 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B)(i)-Giii).. The Court’s

3 determination is without prejudice to further determinations on the merits as this matter proceeds,

4 || after the Commissioner appears and both Parties assert any further arguments, records, or other

5 || matters following the proper procedures and timing requirements for this case.

6 Accordingly, it is ORDERED that:

7 1. Plaintiff's Complaint in this case [Dkt. 1] shall NOT be dismissed pursuant to 28 U.S.C.

8 § 1915(e)(2)(B).

9 2. In accordance with Rule 3 of the Supplemental Rules for Social Security Actions Under 42

10 U.S.C. § 405(g), a notice of electronic filing shall be transmitted to the Social Security

11 Administration’s Office of General Counsel and to the United States Attorney’s Office for

12 the Northern District of California in lieu of service of a summons. See Fed. R. Civ. P.

13 Supp. Soc. Sec. R. 3 (“The court must notify the Commissioner of the commencement of

14 the action by transmitting a Notice of Electronic filing to the appropriate office within the

15 Social Security Administration’s Office of General Counsel and to the United States

a 16 Attorney for the district where the action is filed... . The plaintiff need not serve a

2 17 summons and complaint under Civil Rule 4.”).

18

19 || ITIS SO ORDERED.

20 || Dated: February 27, 2024

21 :

22 United Sates Magistrate Judge

23

24

25

26

27

28