Opinion

BODDY v. SAUL

Court
District Court, W.D. Pennsylvania
Filed
Dec 9, 2020
Cited by
0 cases
Authority
More cited than 29.3%

The opinion

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA

CHERYL BODDY, )

)

Plaintiff, )

)

-vs- ) Civil Action No. 20-490

)

)

ANDREW M. SAUL, )

COMMISSIONER OF SOCIAL SECURITY, )

)

Defendant. )

AMBROSE, Senior District Judge

MEMORANDUM ORDER

Pending before the court is Defendant’s Motion to Stay this proceeding due to pending

litigation before the United States Supreme Court in Carr v. Saul, __ S.Ct. __, No. 19-1442,

2020 WL 6551771 (U.S. Nov. 9, 2020) (granting petition for writ of certiorari out of 10th Circuit

Court of Appeals); and Davis v. Saul, __ S.Ct. __, No. 20-105, 2020 WL 6551772 (U.S. Nov. 9,

2020) (same out of 8th Circuit Court of Appeals). (ECF No. 18). Defendant filed a Brief in

Support of his Motion and Plaintiff filed a Response in Opposition to the same. (ECF Nos. 19

and 20). Defendant asserts that a stay is appropriate here because the Supreme Court’s

decision in these cases “may resolve” a circuit split on the issue before me in this case --

whether Plaintiff forfeited her Appointments Clause challenge by failing to raise the issue during

the administrative proceedings. After careful consideration of the submissions of the parties,

Defendant’s Motion is denied.

The Third Circuit’s decision in Cirko ex rel. Cirko v. Comm’r of Soc. Sec., 948 F.3d 148

(3d Cir. 2020) is binding upon this Court. In Cirko, our Court of Appeals determined that a Social

Security claimant is not required to exhaust her Appointment Clause claim before the agency

prior to raising it in the District Court. Id. at 152, 155. Defendant did not file a petition for

certiorari in Cirko. Cirko has not been consolidated with the pending litigation before the

Supreme Court and has not otherwise been reopened. The Court of Appeals for the Third

Circuit has issued its Mandate in the case, and the decision is final, precedential, and binding

upon this District Court and this case. Cf. Brown v. Saul, No. 2:19-CV-01590, 2020 WL

6566221, at *2 & n.3 (W.D. Pa. Nov. 9, 2020); Hoover v. Saul, Civil No. 1:19-CV-579, 2020 WL

1550663 (M.D. Pa. Apr. 1, 2020).

THEREFORE, this 9th day of December, 2020, it is ordered that Defendant’s Motion for

Stay (ECF No. 18) is DENIED. It is further ordered that Defendant shall file its Cross Motion for

Summary Judgment and Brief in Support by December 17, 2020.

BY THE COURT:

/s/ Donetta W. Ambrose

Donetta W. Ambrose

United States Senior District Judge

This is a copy of a public record, reproduced as it was published. It is not legal advice, and it may not be the version a court would rely on. Check the official source before you cite it.

A word about cookies

We need a few to keep you signed in and the library working. The rest help us see which pages people use and where they get stuck. They stay off unless you say yes.