Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_14-cv-01843/USCOURTS-caed-1_14-cv-01843-2/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 864
Nature of Suit: Social Security - SSID Title XVI
Cause of Action: 42:206 Social Security Benefits

---

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

CYNTHIA Y. MOORE,

Plaintiff,

v.

COMMISSIONER OF SOCIAL 

SECURITY,

Defendant.

1:14-cv-01843-GSA

ORDER DISMISSING FIRST AMENDED 

COMPLAINT WITH LEAVE TO AMEND

(ECF No. 6)

I. INTRODUCTION

Pro se plaintiff Cynthia Moore (“Plaintiff”) filed a Social Security complaint (the 

“Complaint”) on November 24, 2014. ECF No. 1. Plaintiff‟s Complaint was dismissed with leave 

to amend on January 21, 2015. ECF No. 5. Plaintiff then filed a First Amended Complaint 

(“FAC”) on February 23, 2015. ECF No.6.

In the FAC, Plaintiff appears to be challenging a denial of her Social Security benefits. As 

discussed below, however, the Complaint will be dismissed because it fails to state a claim. 

Plaintiff is granted leave to correct the mistakes discussed below and file a second amended 

complaint.

II. DISCUSSION

a. Legal Standard

Under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2), the Court must conduct an initial review of the FAC to 

determine whether it “state[s] a claim on which relief may be granted,” is “frivolous or 

malicious,” or “seek[s] monetary relief against a defendant who is immune from such relief.” If 

Case 1:14-cv-01843-EPG Document 8 Filed 04/08/15 Page 1 of 4
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

2

the Court determines that the FAC fails to state a claim, it must be dismissed. Id. Leave to amend 

may be granted to the extent that the deficiencies of the FAC can be cured by amendment. Cato v. 

United States, 70 F.3d 1103, 1106 (9th Cir. 1995). 

A complaint must contain “a short and plain statement of the claim showing that the 

pleader is entitled to relief . . . .” Fed. R. Civ. P. 8(a)(2). Detailed factual allegations are not 

required, but “[t]hreadbare recitals of the elements of a cause of action, supported by mere 

conclusory statements, do not suffice.” Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 556 U.S. 662, 678 (2009) (citing Bell 

Atlantic Corp. v. Twombly, 550 U.S. 544, 555, 127 S.Ct. 1955, 1964-65 (2007)). Plaintiff must set 

forth “sufficient factual matter, accepted as true, to „state a claim that is plausible on its face.‟” 

Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 556 U.S. at 663 (quoting Twombly, 550 U.S. at 555). While factual allegations 

are accepted as true, legal conclusion are not. Id. at 678.

To determine whether a complaint states an actionable claim, the Court must accept the 

allegations in the complaint as true, Hospital Bldg. Co. v. Trustees of Rex Hospital, 425 U.S. 738, 

740 (1976), construe pro se pleadings liberally in the light most favorable to the Plaintiff, Resnick 

v. Hayes, 213 F.3d 443, 447 (9th Cir. 2000), and resolve all doubts in the Plaintiff‟s favor. 

Jenkins v. McKeithen, 395 U.S. 411, 421 (1969). Pleadings of pro se plaintiffs “must be held to 

less stringent standards than formal pleadings drafted by lawyers.” Hebbe v. Pliler, 627 F.3d 338, 

342 (9th Cir. 2010) (holding that pro se complaints should continue to be liberally construed after 

Iqbal). 

b. Plaintiff’s Allegations

The FAC describes the course of Plaintiff‟s applications for disability and supplemental 

security benefits, concluding with a written decision by Administrative Law Judge Serena Hong 

(“ALJ”) that Plaintiff is not disabled. It does not indicate whether Plaintiff appealed this decision 

to the Appeals Council or the dates of any such appeal. The FAC then proceeds to discuss 

Plaintiff‟s medical treatments after the date of the decision and reiterates the challenges the 

Complaint recited regarding the ALJ‟s decision, It concludes by asking that the Court “look 

deeper into my claim” and attaches 45 pages of assorted records, many of which describe medical 

exams that occurred after the date of the ALJ‟s decision. Several weeks after filing the FAC, 

Case 1:14-cv-01843-EPG Document 8 Filed 04/08/15 Page 2 of 4
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

3

Plaintiff submitted additional medical records from visits to medical offices in 2015. ECF No. 7.

c. Analysis of Plaintiff’s Allegations

Under Rule 8(a) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, a complaint must first set forth a 

“short and plain statement of the grounds for the court‟s jurisdiction.” Under 42 U.S.C. § 405(g), 

a plaintiff appealing a final decision of a denial of Social Security benefits can only come within 

the jurisdiction of this Court if: (1) the appeal is filed within sixty days after she is mailed the 

notice of the final decision of the Commissioner of Social Security; and (2) she resides in the 

district in which the action is filed. 

A “final decision” under 42 U.S.C. § 405(g) is reached only after a lengthy process in 

which Plaintiff must exhaust her administrative remedies. Once a denial of benefits is received, a 

claimant must file for reconsideration of that decision with the Social Security Administration. 20 

C.F.R. § 904.909. If the Administration issues an adverse decision, an individual may request that 

an administrative law judge (“ALJ”) hold a hearing. 20 C.F.R. § 404.929. If the ALJ then issues 

an adverse decision, an appeal may be filed with the Social Security Appeals Council. Any appeal 

to the Appeals Council must be filed within sixty days of the ALJ‟s decision. 20 C.F.R. § 

404.968. Once the Appeals Council issues its decision, a Claimant can file a complaint in the 

United States District Court. This complaint must be filed within sixty days of the Appeals 

Council‟s order. 42 U.S.C. § 405(g). 

As with the Complaint, it is still not clear from the face of the FAC that either of the 

conditions specified by 42 U.S.C. § 405(g) have been met. Although the Complaint states that an 

unfavorable decision was rendered by an ALJ on June 28, 2013, it is still unclear whether the 

requisite appeals process (as laid out above) has been followed. Plaintiff should clearly indicate 

the dates that any appeals were filed with the Appeals Council, as well as the dates and results of 

those appeals, in any amended complaint.1

Plaintiff is reminded that this Court can only review a final decision by the Social Security 

 

1 This is a jurisdictional requirement to challenge the ALJ‟s decision; if Plaintiff did not follow the correct procedure 

with respect to the appeal of the decision, the Court is unable to consider her challenge. Sims v. Apfel, 530 U.S. 103, 

107 (2000) (“If a claimant fails to request review from the Council, there is no final decision and, as a result, no 

judicial review in most cases”). Plaintiff is advised that unless she is able to supply this information, this action 

may be dismissed for lack of subject matter jurisdiction.

Case 1:14-cv-01843-EPG Document 8 Filed 04/08/15 Page 3 of 4
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

4

Administration to determine whether: (1) it is supported by substantial evidence; and (2) it 

applied the correct legal standards. Carmickle v. Commissioner, 533 F.3d 1155, 1159 (9th Cir. 

2008). In other words, the Court will not rehear the entirety of Plaintiff‟s case or review evidence 

that was not put before the ALJ. Plaintiff is thus advised that she should not submit documents 

that she believes will “supplement” the record or file any additional evidence of further medical 

visits to the Court.

III. LEAVE TO AMEND

The Court will provide Plaintiff an opportunity to amend the FAC to fix the issues 

identified above. If Plaintiff chooses to file a Second Amended Complaint, it must bear the docket 

number assigned in this case and be labeled “Second Amended Complaint.” As a general rule, an 

amended complaint supersedes any earlier complaints. Lacey v. Maricopa Cnty., 693 F.3d 896 

(9th Cir. 2012) (noting that there may be limited exceptions to this rule on appeal). In other 

words, the amended complaint must be “complete in itself without reference to the prior or 

superseded pleading.” Local Rule 220. 

IV. ORDER

For the reasons set forth above, Plaintiff‟s FAC is DISMISSED WITH LEAVE TO 

AMEND. Plaintiff is instructed to consider the standards set forth in this Order and should only 

file an amended complaint if she believes her claims are cognizable. Any amended complaint 

shall be filed no later than May 8, 2015. Failure to file an amended complaint by the date 

specified will result in dismissal of this action.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: April 8, 2015 /s/ Gary S. Austin 

 UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Case 1:14-cv-01843-EPG Document 8 Filed 04/08/15 Page 4 of 4