Ortiz v. Commissioner of Social Security, 1:24-cv-04258

Plaintiff Lorrain O. filed a pro se complaint challenging the Commissioner of Social Security’s denial of Disability Insurance Benefits.
The parties consented to Magistrate Judge jurisdiction in June 2024.
The Commissioner filed a brief opposing review on February 7, 2025; Plaintiff did not reply by the deadline, nor after an extension was granted.
The Court explicitly warned Plaintiff that failure to submit a reply brief could result in dismissal for failure to prosecute.
Plaintiff failed to appear for her administrative hearing and did not provide good cause for her absence.
The Court dismissed the case, affirming the Commissioner’s decision.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Failure to appear at administrative hearing	Plaintiff did not submit any argument or explanation.	Commissioner argued Plaintiff failed to attend the hearing without good cause, supporting denial.	No abuse of discretion; Commissioner’s decision affirmed.
Good cause for failure to appear	No brief or justification presented.	Commissioner stated Plaintiff did not meet the burden to show good cause.	Court found no good cause shown.
Judicial review of benefits denial	Plaintiff sought review (no supporting brief filed).	Commissioner argued denial was justified by substantial evidence.	Judicial review denied; denial of benefits affirmed.
Failure to prosecute	No response to Court orders or deadlines.	Commissioner moved for dismissal due to Plaintiff’s inactivity.	Dismissal for failure to prosecute granted.

None with reporter citations; all cited authorities are via Westlaw or similar services and are not listed per instructions.