Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_12-cv-01680/USCOURTS-caed-1_12-cv-01680-1/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
Commissioner of Social Security
Defendant
Rose Riddle
Plaintiff

Document Text:

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

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

ROSE RIDDLE,

Plaintiff,

v.

MICHAEL J. ASTRUE, 

Commissioner of Social Security,

Defendant.

 /

CASE NO. 1:12-cv-01680-SMS

ORDER DISMISSING COMPLAINT FOR

FAILURE TO STATE A CLAIM, WITH

LEAVE TO AMEND WITHIN THIRTY DAYS

(Doc. 1)

Screening Order

 “Notwithstanding any filing fee, or any portion thereof, that may have been paid, the

Court shall dismiss the case at any time if the Court determines that . . . the action or appeal . . .

fails to state a claim upon which relief may be granted.” 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B)(ii).

Plaintiff Rose Riddle, proceeding in forma pauperis, by her attorney, Dellert Baird Law

Offices, PLLC, filed her complaint on October 11, 2012. Because Plaintiff’s complaint fails to

state a claim upon which relief can be granted, 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B)(ii) requires this Court

to dismiss it. 

I. Screening Requirement

The statutory privilege of proceeding in forma pauperis is a privilege, not a right. 

Williams v. Field, 394 F.2d 329, 332 (9 Cir.), cert. denied, 393 U.S. 891 (1968); Smart v. th

Heinze, 347 F.2d 114, 116 (9 Cir.), cert. denied, (1965). “Indigence does not create a th

constitutional right to the expenditure of public funds and the valuable time of the courts in order

to prosecute an action which is totally without merit.” Phillips v. Mashburn, 746 F.2d 782, 785

1

Case 1:12-cv-01680-SMS Document 6 Filed 10/17/12 Page 1 of 6
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

(11 Cir. 1984). Accordingly, the statute requires the Court to screen any case in which a th

plaintiff proceeds in forma pauperis, as provided in 28 U.S.C. § 1915. Screening is required

even if the plaintiff pursues an appeal of right, such as an appeal of the Commissioner’s denial of

social security disability benefits. See, e.g., 42 U.S.C. § 405(g) (establishing conditions under

which a claimant of social security benefits may seek judicial review of the Commissioner’s

determination). A court must dismiss any case, regardless of the fee paid, if the action or appeal

is (1) frivolous or malicious; (2) fails to state a claim on which relief may be granted; or (3) seeks

monetary relief from a defendant who is immune from such relief. 28 U.S.C. § 1915 (e)(2)(B). 

II. Cognizable Claim

In determining whether a complaint fails to state a cognizable claim, a court applies

substantially the same standard applied in motions to dismiss pursuant to F.R.Civ.P. 12(b)(6). 

Gutierrez v. Astrue, 2011 WL 1087261 at *1 (E.D.Cal. March 23, 2011) (No. 1:11-cv-00454-

GSA). “The focus of any Rule 12(b)(6) dismissal . . . . is the complaint.” Schneider v.

California Department of Corrections, 151 F.3d 1194, 1197 n. 1 (9 Cir. 1998). A court must th

dismiss a complaint, or portion of a complaint, for failure to state a claim upon which relief can

be granted if it appears beyond doubt that the plaintiff can prove no set of facts in support of his

or her claim(s) that would entitled the plaintiff to relief. Hishon v. King & Spalding, 467 U.S.

69, 73 (1984). When a court reviews a complaint under this standard, it must accept as true the

complaint’s allegations (Hospital Bldg. Co. v. Trustees of Rex Hospital, 425 U.S. 738, 740

(1976)), construe the pleadings in the light most favorable to the plaintiff (Resnick v. Hayes, 213

F.3d 443, 447 (9 Cir. 2000)), and resolve all doubts in the plaintiff’s favor (Jenkins v. th

McKeithen, 395 U.S. 411, 421 (1969)).

A. Short and Plain Statement

The sufficiency of a complaint is first determined by referring to F.R.Civ.P. 8(a) which

requires that a civil complaint contain:

(1) a short and plain statement of the grounds for the court’s jurisdiction,

unless the court already has jurisdiction and the claim needs no new

jurisdictional support;

2

Case 1:12-cv-01680-SMS Document 6 Filed 10/17/12 Page 2 of 6
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) a short and plain statement of the claim showing the pleader is entitled to

relief; and

(3) a demand for the relief sought which may include relief in the alternative

or different types of relief.

 “Rule 8(a)’s simplified pleading standard applies to all civil actions, with limited

exceptions.” Swierkiewicz v. Sorema N. A., 534 U.S. 506, 512 (2002). A complaint appealing

the Commissioner’s decision denying social security disability benefits is not exempt from the

general rules of civil pleading. “While [42 U.S.C.] § 405(g) does not require that a complaint

spell out the basis upon which relief might be granted, Rule 8(a) requires a civil plaintiff to assert

the basis upon which he grounds his claim.” Brown v. Astrue, 2011 WL 3664429 at *2 (D. N.H.

August 19, 2011) (No. 11-cv-056-JL). The complaint must “must simply give the defendant fair

notice of what the plaintiff’s claim is and the grounds upon which it rests.” Swierkiewicz, 534

U.S. at 512. In preparing her amended complaint, Plaintiff should state specifically why the facts

of her situation did not support those of the ALJ’s legal conclusions that she contends where not

supported by substantial evidence.

B. Principles of Pleading

1. Factual Allegations and Legal Conclusions 

Determining a complaint’s sufficiency invokes two underlying principles of pleading. 

Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 556 U.S. 662, 678-79 (2009); Bell Atlantic Corp. v. Twombly, 550 U.S. 544,

555 (2007). First, the Court must accept as true the well-pleaded factual allegations of the

complaint. Twombly, 550 U.S. at 555. Detailed factual allegations are not required, but

“[t]hreadbare recitals of the elements of the cause of action, supported by mere conclusory

statements, do not suffice.” Iqbal, 556 U.S. at 678. “Plaintiff must set forth sufficient factual

matter accepted as true, to ‘state a claim that is plausible on its face.’” Iqbal, 129 S.Ct. at 1949,

quoting Twombly, 550 U.S. at 555. 

Although accepted as true, “[f]actual allegations must be [sufficient] to raise a right to

relief above the speculative level.” Twombly, 550 U.S. at 555 (citations omitted). A plaintiff

must set forth “the grounds of his entitlement to relief,” which “requires more than labels and

conclusions, and a formulaic recitation of the elements of a cause of action.” Id. at 555-56

3

Case 1:12-cv-01680-SMS Document 6 Filed 10/17/12 Page 3 of 6
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

(internal quotation marks and citations omitted). A complaint appealing the Commissioner’s

denial of disability benefits must set forth a brief statement of facts setting forth the reasons why

the Commissioner’s decision was wrong. Brown, 2011 WL 3664429 at *3. See also

Demetriades v. Astrue, 2011 WL 4079054 (W.D.Va. September 13, 2011) (No. 7:11-cv-00407)

(dismissing case without prejudice for failure to state a plausible claim for relief as a result of

insufficient factual allegations); Ormsby v. Astrue, 2011 WL 3625101 at * 2, adopted by 2011

WL 3625095 (M.D. Fla. August 4, 2011) (No. 6:11-cv-1262-ORL-22) (dismissing cursory

complaint which alleged insufficient facts to state a cognizable claim).

While factual allegations are accepted as true, legal conclusions are not. Iqbal, 556 U.S.

at 678. A court is “not bound to accept as true a legal conclusion couched as a factual

allegation.” Id. “Nor is the court required to accept as true allegations that are merely

conclusory, unwarranted deductions of fact, or unreasonable inferences.” Sprewell v. Golden

State Warriors, 266 F.3d 979, 988 (9 Cir. 2001). th

A legal conclusion is a statement such as, “ The final decision of the Administrative Law

Judge, review having been denied by the Appeals Council, is erroneous, was based on error of

law, and was not supported by substantial evidence.” Facts include such allegations as “Plaintiff

has severe arthritis, peripheral neuropathy, and fibromyalgia”; “Plaintiff worked as auto

mechanic until June 1, 1990"; and “Plaintiff was fired from her job when she became unable to

grasp her tools.” 

2. Plausible Claim for Relief

The second underlying principle is that “only a complaint that states a plausible claim for

relief survives a motion to dismiss.” Iqbal, 556 U.S. at 679. To permit the Court to determine

that a complaint states a plausible claim for relief, based on the reviewing court’s judicial

experience and common sense, the well-pleaded facts must permit the court “to infer more than a

mere possibility . . . . ‘that the pleader is entitled to relief.’” Id., quoting F.R.Civ.P. 8(a)(2). The

Supreme Court explained:

In keeping with these principles a court considering a motion to dismiss can

choose to begin by identifying pleadings that, because they are no more than

conclusions, are not entitled to the assumption of truth. While legal conclusions

4

Case 1:12-cv-01680-SMS Document 6 Filed 10/17/12 Page 4 of 6
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

can provide the framework of a complaint, they must be supported by factual

allegations. When there are well-pleaded factual allegations, a court should

assume their veracity and then determine whether they plausibly give rise to an

entitlement to relief.

Iqbal, 556 U.S. at 679.

See also Cook v. Astrue, 2012 WL 812380 at *2 (E.D.Cal. March 9, 2012) (No. 1:12-cv00347-GSA) (construing that the facts alleged in the complaint related to two legal conclusions);

Sanchez v. Astrue, 2011 WL 1549307 (E.D. Cal. April 21, 2011) (No. 1:11-cv-00607-GSA). 

This means that the Court cannot accept legal conclusions set forth in a complaint if the plaintiff

has not supported his or her contentions with facts. For example, if a plaintiff alleges only that

he or she is not capable of performing past work without setting forth facts that prove that he or

she cannot do that work, the Court cannot assume that the contention is true.

III. Conclusion and Order

In rejecting Brown’s complaint appealing the Commissioner’s denying him benefits, the

Court observed, “”The complaint’s sole assertion of a basis for relief is that Brown feels the SSA

decision was wrong.” Brown, 2011 WL 3664429 at *2. Every plaintiff appealing an adverse

decision of the Commissioner believes that the Commissioner was wrong. The purpose of the

complaint is to briefly and plainly allege facts supporting the legal conclusion that the

Commissioner’s decision was wrong. Id. at *3. Plaintiff’s amended complaint should do so.

Because the complaint fails to allege facts sufficient to state a claim upon which relief can

be granted, this Court will dismiss it. The Court will provide Plaintiff with an additional

opportunity to file an amended complaint curing the deficiencies identified by the Court in this

order. Plaintiff must revise her complaint to allege facts sufficient to support a cognizable claim. 

Plaintiff’s amended complaint should be brief, but must allege sufficient facts to establish

her cause of action. Fed. R. Civ. P. 8(a). Plaintiff should focus on setting forth, as briefly but

specifically as possible, the facts necessary to state a claim on which relief may be granted. 

Plaintiff must avoid including unnecessary language, as well as advocacy and argumentation

more appropriate in her opening brief, which is to be submitted later.

///

5

Case 1:12-cv-01680-SMS Document 6 Filed 10/17/12 Page 5 of 6
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

 Plaintiff is advised that an amended complaint supercedes all prior complaints, Forsyth v.

Humana, Inc., 114 F.3d 1467, 1474 (9th Cir. 1997), aff’d, 525 U.S. 299 (1999); King v. Atiyeh,

814 F.2d 565, 567 (9th Cir. 1987), and must be “complete in itself without reference to the prior

or superceded pleading.” Local Rule 15-220. “All causes of action alleged in an original

complaint which are not alleged in an amended complaint are waived.” King, 814 F.2d at 567;

accord Forsyth, 114 F.3d at 1474.

Based on the foregoing, it is HEREBY ORDERED that:

1. Plaintiff’s complaint is dismissed with leave to amend for failure to state facts

sufficient to state a claim on which relief may be granted;

2. Within thirty (30) days from the date of service of this order, Plaintiff shall file

an amended complaint curing the deficiencies identified by the Court in this order;

and

3. If Plaintiff fails to file an amended complaint within thirty (30) days from the

date of service of this order, this action will be dismissed with prejudice, pursuant

to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B)(ii), for failure to state a claim.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: October 16, 2012 /s/ Sandra M. Snyder 

icido3 UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

6

Case 1:12-cv-01680-SMS Document 6 Filed 10/17/12 Page 6 of 6