GONZALEZ v. COMMISSIONER OF SOCIAL SECURITY
2:22-cv-03275
E.D. Pa.Apr 11, 2023Background
- Plaintiff Diana Gonzalez filed a Title XVI SSI application for her minor child, S.J.G., on December 4, 2019, alleging disability as of December 15, 2015.
- State agency denied the claim on initial review (March 13, 2020) and on reconsideration (October 6, 2020); ALJ held a hearing and denied benefits on April 14, 2021.
- The Appeals Council denied review by mailed notice dated April 21, 2022; the notice informed Gonzalez of a 60‑day deadline for filing a civil action and the option to request an extension for good cause.
- By operation of the presumption of receipt, the 60‑day limitations period began five days after mailing; the deadline expired June 25, 2022.
- Gonzalez did not request an extension and filed her federal complaint on August 15, 2022 — 51 days after the limitations period expired; the Commissioner moved to dismiss as untimely.
- No panel attorney accepted appointment; the magistrate judge removed the case from the panel, ordered Gonzalez to respond to the motion to dismiss, she did not respond, and the court granted the motion.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Timeliness of filing under 42 U.S.C. § 405(g) | Gonzalez did not present evidence disputing mailing/receipt date or timely filing | AC mailed denial Apr 21, 2022; presumption of receipt in 5 days; complaint due within 60 days; complaint filed Aug 15, 2022 (late) | Complaint untimely; dismissal granted |
| Equitable tolling of the limitations period | Gonzalez offered no facts to show she was prevented from filing or misled | No basis shown for tolling; burden on claimant to prove tolling | Equitable tolling not established; no extension granted |
Key Cases Cited
- Garcia v. Comm'r of Soc. Sec., 53 Fed. Appx. 192 (3d Cir. 2002) (claimant must rebut presumption of timely receipt)
- Bowen v. City of New York, 476 U.S. 467 (1986) (60‑day limitations period for judicial review is a statute of limitations and must be strictly construed; equitable tolling is rare)
- Oshiver v. Levin, Fishbein, Sedran & Berman, 38 F.3d 1380 (3d Cir. 1994) (circumstances that may justify equitable tolling)
- Courtney v. La Salle Univ., 124 F.3d 499 (3d Cir. 1997) (plaintiff bears burden to establish equitable tolling)