Case Name: John MAY, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. COMMISSIONER OF THE SOCIAL SECURITY ADMINISTRATION, Defendant-Appellee
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2005-06-24
Citations: 137 F. App'x 87
Docket Number: No. 04-35686
Parties: John MAY, Plaintiff—Appellant, v. COMMISSIONER OF THE SOCIAL SECURITY ADMINISTRATION, Defendant—Appellee.
Judges: Before: KLEINFELD, TASHIMA, and THOMAS, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 137
Pages: 87–88

Head Matter:
John MAY, Plaintiff—Appellant, v. COMMISSIONER OF THE SOCIAL SECURITY ADMINISTRATION, Defendant—Appellee.
No. 04-35686.
United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
Submitted June 14, 2005.
Decided June 24, 2005.
Walter M. Hennessey, Esq., Hennessey and Joyce, Butte, MT, for Plaintiff-Appellant.
George F. Darragh, Jr., Esq., Office of the U.S. Attorney, Great Falls, MT, for Defendant-Appellee.
Before: KLEINFELD, TASHIMA, and THOMAS, Circuit Judges.
The panel unanimously finds this case suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2).

Opinion:
MEMORANDUM
John May appeals from the district court's judgment dismissing his action seeking review of the Commissioner of Social Security's denial of his claim for disability benefits. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We review de novo a district court's determination that it lacks subject matter jurisdiction, Galt G/S v. JSS Scandinavia, 142 F.3d 1150, 1153 (9th Cir.1998), and we affirm.
The district court properly dismissed May's action for lack of jurisdiction because the Commissioner's denial of his request to reopen was not a "final decision" conferring jurisdiction under 42 U.S.C. § 405(g), see Krumpelman v. Heckler, 767 F.2d 586, 588 (9th Cir.1985) ("[djistrict courts . have no jurisdiction to review a refusal to re-open a claim for disability benefits or the determination that such a claim is res judicata"), and May did not present a colorable constitutional claim, see Panages v. Bowen, 871 F.2d 91, 93 (9th Cir.1989) (per curiam).
AFFIRMED.
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and may not be cited to or by the courts of this circuit except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.