UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS 

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT 

No. 09-1535

DANIEL F. STEWART, 

 Plaintiff – Appellant, 

 v. 

SOCIAL SECURITY ADMINISTRATION, 

 Defendant – Appellee. 

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of 

Maryland, at Greenbelt. Peter J. Messitte, Senior District 

Judge. (8:09-cv-00781-PJM) 

Submitted: January 25, 2010 Decided: February 10, 2010 

Before WILKINSON, DUNCAN, and AGEE, Circuit Judges. 

Vacated and remanded by unpublished per curiam opinion. 

Daniel F. Stewart, Appellant Pro Se.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. 
PER CURIAM: 

 While an inmate at the Eastern Pre-Release Unit in 

Maryland, Daniel Floyd Stewart filed a complaint on March 24, 

2009, against the Social Security Administration (“SSA”). The 

court directed Stewart to submit additional information because 

the complaint did not make clear what decision he was 

challenging and on what basis. Based on the supplemental 

documentation filed by Stewart, it was discerned that an 

Administrative Law Judge denied Stewart supplemental security 

income payments from November 19, 2003, through June 29, 2006, 

the date he was incarcerated, and that the Appeals Council 

denied the appeal on December 18, 2008. The district court 

dismissed the complaint as untimely filed. We vacate the 

district court’s order and remand for further proceedings. 

 Under 42 U.S.C. § 405(g) (2006), an individual may 

obtain review of a final decision of the Commissioner of Social 

Security in federal district court by commencing a civil action 

“within sixty days after the mailing to him of notice of such 

decision or within such further time as the Commissioner of 

Social Security may allow.” 42 U.S.C. § 405(g). The 

regulations clarify that a civil action must be commenced within 

sixty days after the Appeals Council’s decision “is received by 

the individual . . . except that this time may be extended by 

the Appeals Council upon a showing of good cause.” 20 C.F.R. 

2 
3 

§ 422.210(c) (2009). The date of receipt of the notice is 

presumed to be five days after the date of such notice, unless 

there is a reasonable showing to the contrary. Id. 

 On its face, Stewart’s complaint, dated March 21, 

2009, is clearly untimely. However, Stewart submits on appeal, 

as he did below through a letter he attached to his complaint, 

that the Appeals Council extended his time to file a judicial 

complaint. The Council’s letter specifically states that the 

Council received Stewart’s request for more time to file a civil 

action and that the Council grants Stewart a forty-five day 

extension of time to file a civil complaint from the date of 

receipt of the Council’s letter, dated February 26, 2009. 

 Because the Appeals Council is authorized to extend 

the time for filing a judicial complaint, Stewart received such 

an extension, and his complaint is timely filed in light of the 

extension, we vacate the district court’s order and remand for 

the district court’s consideration of Stewart’s complaint as 

timely filed. We dispense with oral argument because the facts 

and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials 

before the court and argument would not aid the decisional 

process. 

VACATED AND REMANDED