Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_14-cv-01581/USCOURTS-caed-1_14-cv-01581-1/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
Commissioner of Social Security
Defendant
Parrish Jean Moore
Plaintiff

Document Text:

1

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

Plaintiff Parrish Jean Moore seeks to proceed in forma pauperis with an action for judicial 

review of the administrative decision denying his application for Social Security benefits. Because 

Pending before the Court are the complaint filed by Plaintiff on October 8, 2014 (Doc. 1) and motion 

to proceed in forma pauperis (Doc. 2), which was amended by Plaintiff on October 22, 2014 (Doc. 4).

I. MOTION TO PROCEED IN FORMA PAUPERIS

The Court may authorize the commencement of an action without prepayment of fees “but a 

person who submits an affidavit that includes a statement of all assets such person . . . possesses [and] 

that the person is unable to pay such fees or give security therefor.” 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a). The Court 

has reviewed the applications and finds Plaintiff satisfies the requirements of 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a). 

Therefore, Plaintiff’s request to proceed in forma pauperis is GRANTED.

///

PARRISH JEAN MOORE,

 Plaintiff,

v.

COMMISSIONER OF SOCIAL SECURITY,

Defendant.

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

Case No.: 1:14-cv-01581 - JLT

ORDER GRANTING PLAINTIFF’S MOTIONS TO 

PROCEED INFORMA PAUPERIS (Docs. 2, 4)

ORDER DISMISSING COMPLAINT WITH 

LEAVE TO AMEND

Case 1:14-cv-01581-JLT Document 5 Filed 10/31/14 Page 1 of 5
2

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

II. SCREENING REQUIREMENT

When an individual seeks to proceed in forma pauperis, the Court is required to review the 

complaint and shall dismiss a complaint, or portion of the complaint, if it is “frivolous, malicious or 

fails to state a claim upon which relief may be granted; or . . . seeks monetary relief from a defendant 

who is immune from such relief.” 28 U.S.C. § 1915A(b); 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2). A plaintiff’s claim 

is frivolous “when the facts alleged rise to the level of the irrational or the wholly incredible, whether 

or not there are judicially noticeable facts available to contradict them.” Denton v. Hernandez, 504 

U.S. 25, 32-33 (1992). 

III. PLEADING STANDARDS

General rules for pleading complaints are governed by the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. A 

pleading must include a statement affirming the court’s jurisdiction, “a short and plain statement of the 

claim showing the pleader is entitled to relief; and... a demand for the relief sought, which may include 

relief in the alternative or different types of relief.” Fed. R. Civ. P. 8(a). 

A complaint must state the elements of the plaintiff’s claim in a plain and succinct manner. 

Jones v. Cmty Redevelopment Agency, 733 F.2d 646, 649 (9th Cir. 1984). The purpose of the 

complaint is to give the defendant fair notice of the claims against him, and the grounds upon which 

the complaint stands. Swierkiewicz v. Sorema N.A., 534 U.S. 506, 512 (2002). The Supreme Court 

explained,

Rule 8 does not require detailed factual allegations, but it demands more than an 

unadorned, the-defendant-unlawfully-harmed-me accusation. A pleading that offers 

labels and conclusions or a formulaic recitation of the elements of a cause of action will 

not do. Nor does a complaint suffice if it tenders naked assertions devoid of further 

factual enhancement.

Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 556 U.S. 662, 678-79 (2009) (internal quotation marks and citations omitted). 

Conclusory and vague allegations do not support a cause of action. Ivey v. Board of Regents, 673 F.2d 

266, 268 (9th Cir. 1982). The Court clarified further,

[A] complaint must contain sufficient factual matter, accepted as true, to “state a claim 

to relief that is plausible on its face.” [Citation]. A claim has facial plausibility when 

the plaintiff pleads factual content that allows the court to draw the reasonable 

inference that the defendant is liable for the misconduct alleged. [Citation]. The 

plausibility standard is not akin to a “probability requirement,” but it asks for more than 

a sheer possibility that a defendant has acted unlawfully. [Citation]. Where a complaint 

Case 1:14-cv-01581-JLT Document 5 Filed 10/31/14 Page 2 of 5
3

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

pleads facts that are “merely consistent with” a defendant’s liability, it “stops short of 

the line between possibility and plausibility of ‘entitlement to relief.’

Iqbal, 556 U.S. at 679 (citations omitted). When factual allegations are well-pled, a court should 

assume the truth and determine whether the facts would make the plaintiff entitled to relief; conclusions 

in the pleading are not entitled to the same assumption of truth. Id. The Court may grant leave to 

amend a complaint to the extent deficiencies of the complaint can be cured by amendment. Lopez v. 

Smith, 203 F.3d 1122, 1127-28 (9th Cir. 2000) (en banc).

IV. DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS

Plaintiff’s complaint indicates her application and appeal for Social Security benefits have 

been denied, and she seeks review of the decision by the Commissioner of Social Security to deny 

benefits. (Doc. 1 at 1-2.) The Court has jurisdiction over such claims pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 405(g), 

which provides in relevant part:

Any individual, after any final decision of the Commissioner made after a hearing to 

which he was a party, irrespective of the amount in controversy, may obtain a review of 

such decision by a civil action commenced within sixty days after the mailing to him of 

such decision or within such further time as the Commissioner may allow. Such action 

shall be brought in the district court of the United States for the judicial district in 

which the plaintiff resides, or has his principal place of business . . . The court shall 

have power to enter, upon the pleadings and transcript of the record, a judgment 

affirming, modifying, or reversing the decision of the Commissioner of Social Security, 

with or without remanding the cause for a rehearing.

Id. Except as provided by statute, “[n]o findings of fact or decision of the Commissioner shall be 

reviewed by any person, tribunal, or governmental agency.” 42 U.S.C. § 405(h). 

Importantly, Plaintiff fails to provide any information regardin if or when the Appeals Council 

denied her request for review of the decision rendered by the administrative law judge. Further, there 

is no information provided regarding when the administrative law judg issued a decision on Plaintiff’s 

application for benefits. Therefore, from the face of Plaintiff’s complaint, it is not clear that the Court 

has jurisdiction over the matter pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 405(g).

V. CONCLUSION AND ORDER

Leave to amend should be granted to the extent that the deficiencies of the complaint can be 

cured by amendment. Lopez, 203 F.3d at 1130. A complaint, or a portion thereof, should only be 

dismissed for failure to state a claim upon which relief may be granted if it appears beyond doubt that 

Case 1:14-cv-01581-JLT Document 5 Filed 10/31/14 Page 3 of 5
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

the Plaintiff can prove no set of facts, consistent with the allegations, in support of the claim that would 

entitle her to relief. See Hishon v. King & Spalding, 467 U.S. 69, 73 (1984) (citation omitted); see also

Palmer v. Roosevelt Lake Log Owners’ Ass’n., Inc., 651 F.2d 1289, 1294 (9th Cir. 1981). 

Here the Court cannot find with certainty that Plaintiff cannot allege facts supporting a finding 

that the Court has jurisdiction over the matter. The Court will grant Plaintiff leave to amend the 

complaint to cure the deficiencies of this complaint by stating the necessary information regarding if 

and when the request for an extension of time was granted by the Appeals Council. Failure to cure the 

deficiencies will result in a recommendation that the matter be dismissed.

Plaintiff is informed that the Court cannot refer to a prior pleading in order to make her 

amended complaint complete. Local Rule 220 requires that an amended complaint be complete in 

itself without reference to any prior pleading. As a general rule, an amended complaint supersedes the 

original complaint. See Loux v. Rhay, 375 F.2d 55, 57 (9th Cir. 1967). Once Plaintiff files an 

amended complaint, the original pleading no longer serves any function in the case. The amended 

complaint must bear the docket number assigned this case and must be labeled “First Amended 

Complaint.” Failure to file an amended complaint in accordance with this order will be considered to 

be a failure to comply with an order of the Court pursuant to Local Rule 110 and will result in 

dismissal of this action.

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED:

1. Plaintiff’s motions to proceed in forma pauperis (Docs. 2, 4) are GRANTED;

2. Plaintiff’s complaint IS DISMISSED with leave to amend; and

3. Plaintiff is GRANTED 30 days from the date of service of this order to file an 

amended complaint that complies with the requirements of the pertinent substantive 

law, the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, and the Local Rules of Practice. 

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: October 30, 2014 /s/ Jennifer L. Thurston 

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Case 1:14-cv-01581-JLT Document 5 Filed 10/31/14 Page 4 of 5
5

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

Case 1:14-cv-01581-JLT Document 5 Filed 10/31/14 Page 5 of 5