Case Name: David E. HENDERSON, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Ramona SCHUENEMEYER, Regional Commissioner, Defendant-Appellee
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2009-05-27
Citations: 325 F. App'x 397
Docket Number: No. 09-50123
Parties: David E. HENDERSON, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Ramona SCHUENEMEYER, Regional Commissioner, Defendant-Appellee.
Judges: 
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 325
Pages: 397–397

Head Matter:
David E. HENDERSON, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Ramona SCHUENEMEYER, Regional Commissioner, Defendant-Appellee.
No. 09-50123
Summary Calendar.
United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit.
May 27, 2009.
David E. Henderson, for Plaintiff-Appellant.
Before KING, DENNIS, and OWEN, Circuit Judges.

Opinion:
PER CURIAM:
Pro se appellant David Henderson brought suit against Ramona Schuenemeyer, Regional Commissioner of the Social Security Administration, seeking recovery of a social security insurance payment that was allegedly deposited into a wrong account. The district court adopted the magistrate judge's report and recommendation, which concluded that the court lacked subject matter jurisdiction and that Henderson failed to state a claim. The district court dismissed Henderson's claim with prejudice. On appeal, Henderson does not contend that the district court's legal conclusions were incorrect. See Brinkmann v. Abner, 813 F.2d 744, 748 (5th Cir.1987). Instead, Henderson argues that both the district court judge and the magistrate judge were biased against him in violation of his due process rights and alleges that the district court judge met secretly with Schuenemeyer outside of Henderson's presence.
Henderson presents no evidence indicating bias on the part of either judge or suggesting that the district court judge had any interaction with Schuenemeyer. Therefore, we AFFIRM the district court's dismissal with prejudice.
Pursuant to 5th Cir. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5th Cir. R. 47.5.4.