UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO 

EASTERN DIVISION 

JOHN W. McQUEEN, 

Plaintiff, 

vs. 

NANCY BERRYHILL, 

Defendant. 

ORDER 

Civil Action 2:12-cv-1124 

Judge Watson 

Magistrate Judge King 

Plaintiff, a state prisoner, claims that he is entitled to Social Security 

benefits but that defendant, apparently an employee of the Social Security 

Administration, has refused to pay those benefits to plaintiff. The United States 

Magistrate Judge recommended that the case be dismissed because the 

Commissioner of Social Security is the only proper defendant in a claim for 

Social Security benefits, see 42 U.S.C. § 405(g), and because the Court lacks 

subject matter jurisdiction over the action, which does not appear to be based on 

a final administrative decision following a hearing. /d. (a court may review the 

denial of Social Security benefits only after the Commissioner of Social Security 

has issued a final decision "made after a hearing ... "). Report and 

Recommendation, Doc. No. 6. This matter is now before the Court on plaintiff's 

Case: 2:12-cv-01124-MHW-NMK Doc #: 11 Filed: 02/07/13 Page: 1 of 3 PAGEID #: <pageID>
objection to that recommendation. Objection, Doc. No. 10. The Court will 

consider the matter de novo. See 28 U.S.C. § 636(b); Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b). 

Plaintiff does not address the issue of the proper defendant. Plaintiff does, 

however, contend that a hearing was held. In support of this contention, plaintiff 

refers to a January 23, 2012 letter received by him from the Social Security 

Administration, Exhibit attached to Complaint, which refers to a "talk" with plaintiff 

and which reflects an "informal decision" that plaintiff is not eligible for 

Supplemental Security Income ("SSI") because he is incarcerated. The Court 

notes that the letter also indicates that plaintiff had not filed a formal application 

for benefits. /d. 

That letter does not establish that plaintiff has followed the proper 

procedures. The administrative hearing referred to in § 405(g) is a hearing 

before an administrative law judge within the Social Security Administration's 

Office of Hearings and Appeals and is held only after an application for benefits 

has been denied. See 42 U.S.C. § 405(b)(1); 20 C.F.R. § 416.1429. Because 

plaintiff has not, apparently, even filed a formal application for SSI benefits, an 

informal decision advising plaintiff why he is not eligible for SSI does not qualify 

as the administrative hearing required before a court can review a claim for 

benefits. 

Plaintiff also complains that the Social Security Administration did not 

inform him of the proper procedures to follow. To the contrary, the letter that 

Case No. 2:12-cv-1124 Page 2 of3 

Case: 2:12-cv-01124-MHW-NMK Doc #: 11 Filed: 02/07/13 Page: 2 of 3 PAGEID #: <pageID>
plaintiff attached to his Complaint expressly recommends that plaintiff file a claim 

for benefits, which is the first step in the administrative process. 

Plaintiff's objections to the Report and Recommendation are DENIED. 

The Report and Recommendation, Doc. No. 6, is ADOPTED AND AFFIRMED. 

This action is hereby DISMISSED. 

The Clerk is DIRECTED to enter FINAL JUDGMENT . 

Case No. 2:12-cv-1124 

M CHAEL H. WATSON, 

. w~ JUDGE 

UNITED STATES DISTRIC COURT 

Page 3 of3 

Case: 2:12-cv-01124-MHW-NMK Doc #: 11 Filed: 02/07/13 Page: 3 of 3 PAGEID #: <pageID>