Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

Dando v. Commissioner of Social Security

United States District Court, E.D. California

June 30, 2017

KAYLA DANDO, Plaintiff,
v.
COMMISSIONER OF SOCIAL SECURITY, Defendant.

          ORDER DISMISSING COMPLAINT WITH LEAVE TO AMEND (ECF NO. 1)

         On June 23, 2017, Plaintiff Kayla Dando, appearing pro se and in forma pauperis, filed this social security action. (ECF No. 1.)

         I.

         SCREENING REQUIREMENT

         The district court must perform a preliminary screening and must dismiss a case if at any time the Court determines that the complaint fails to state a claim upon which relief may be granted. 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2); see Lopez v. Smith, 203 F.3d 1122, 1129 (9th Cir. 2000) (section 1915(e) applies to all in forma pauperis complaints, not just those filed by prisoners). In determining whether a complaint fails to state a claim, the Court uses the same pleading standard used under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 8(a). A complaint must contain “a short and plain statement of the claim showing that the pleader is entitled to relief. . . .” Fed.R.Civ.P. 8(a)(2). Detailed factual allegations are not required, but “[t]hreadbare recitals of the elements of a cause of action, supported by mere conclusory statements, do not suffice.” Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 556 U.S. 662, 678 (2009) (citing Bell Atlantic Corp. v. Twombly, 550 U.S. 544, 555 (2007)). Under Rule 8(a)(1) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, a complaint must set forth a “short and plain statement of the grounds for the court's jurisdiction.” In reviewing the pro se complaint, the Court is to liberally construe the pleadings and accept as true all factual allegations contained in the complaint. Erickson v. Pardus, 551 U.S. 89, 94 (2007). Although a court must accept as true all factual allegations contained in a complaint, a court need not accept a plaintiff's legal conclusions as true. Iqbal, 556 U.S. at 678. “[A] complaint [that] pleads facts that are ‘merely consistent with' a defendant's liability . . . ‘stops short of the line between possibility and plausibility of entitlement to relief.'” Iqbal, 556 U.S. at 678 (quoting Twombly, 550 U.S. at 557). Therefore, the complaint must contain sufficient factual content for the court to draw the reasonable conclusion that the defendant is liable for the misconduct alleged. Iqbal, 556 U.S. at 678.

         Similarly, the court may dismiss a claim as factually frivolous when the facts alleged lack an arguable basis in law or in fact or embraces fanciful factual allegations. Neitzke v. Williams, 490 U.S. 319, 325 (1989). Further, a claim can be dismissed where a complete defense is obvious on the face of the complaint. Franklin v. Murphy, 745 F.2d 1221, 1228 (9th Cir. 1984).

         II.

         COMPLAINT ALLEGATIONS

         Plaintiff indicates that she is bringing this complaint based on Title XVI of the Americans with Disabilities Act (“ADA”) because the Social Security Administration (“SSA”) is denying her equal access to benefits that she is qualified to receive. (ECF No. 1 at 4-5.) She contends that she has submitted adequate documentation to the SSA over a lengthy period of time that supports her contention and that she was denied due process. (ECF No. 1 at 5.)

         III. DISCUSSION

         Although Plaintiff refers to Title XVI of the ADA, there is no Title XVI of the ADA. See 42 U.S.C. § 12101 et seq. Liberally construing Plaintiff's complaint, it appears that Plaintiff is bringing this action because she was denied benefits under Title XVI of the Social Security Act. Title XVI of the Social Security Act allows claimants to apply for supplemental security income. 42 U.S.C. §§ 1381-1383f. Title II of the Social Security Act allows claimants to apply for a period of disability and disability insurance benefits. 42 U.S.C. §§ 401-433.

         The Court will first address the requirements for a claim based on the denial of benefits under Title II and/or Title XVI of the Social Security Act. The Court will then address Plaintiff's claim that she was denied due process by the SSA.

         A. Review of a Final Decision of the Commissioner of Social Security

         To the extent that Plaintiff is challenging a final decision of the Commissioner of Social Security under Title II and/or Title XVI of the Social Security Act, the Court will address the requirements to state a claim, including timeliness, exhaustion, and factual allegations sufficient to state a claim.

         1. Timeliness and Exhaustion Pursuant to 42 ...


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.