(SS) Flores v. Commissioner of Social Security
1:20-cv-00701
E.D. Cal.May 21, 2020Background
- Plaintiff Juan Tony Flores seeks judicial review of the Commissioner’s denial of Social Security disability benefits.
- Appeals Council denied Flores’s request for review on March 27, 2020; Flores filed this action before the 65-day deadline, so the complaint was timely under 42 U.S.C. § 405(g).
- Flores filed an affidavit to proceed in forma pauperis under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a); the Court reviewed the affidavit and granted IFP status.
- The Court conducted the required screening under 28 U.S.C. §§ 1915A and 1915(e)(2) to determine whether the complaint is frivolous or fails to state a claim.
- Applying Rule 8 and Supreme Court pleading precedents, the Court found the complaint states a cognizable claim for review and is not frivolous.
- The case is stayed under General Order 615; accordingly, no summons will issue while the stay remains in effect.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Motion to proceed IFP under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a) | Flores submitted an affidavit showing inability to pay court fees | No opposition noted | IFP granted after court review of affidavit |
| Screening under §§ 1915A/1915(e)(2) — dismissal for frivolousness or failure to state a claim | Flores’s complaint alleges a cognizable claim for judicial review of the denial of benefits | No opposition argued; court must still screen for frivolousness or failure to state a claim | Complaint not frivolous and states a cognizable claim; screening passed |
| Jurisdiction and timeliness under 42 U.S.C. § 405(g) | Action filed within the allowable period after Appeals Council denial | No opposition noted | Filing was timely and court has jurisdiction to review the Commissioner’s decision |
| Issuance of summons / case processing | Flores seeks review to proceed | Defendant did not move to quash; but court must follow local administrative orders | Case stayed by General Order 615; no summons will issue while stay remains |
Key Cases Cited
- Denton v. Hernandez, 504 U.S. 25 (1992) (defines frivolousness standard under in forma pauperis screening)
- Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 556 U.S. 662 (2009) (pleading must contain factual content allowing plausible inference of liability)
- Swierkiewicz v. Sorema N.A., 534 U.S. 506 (2002) (complaint’s purpose is to give defendant fair notice of claims and grounds)
- Ivey v. Board of Regents, 673 F.2d 266 (9th Cir. 1982) (vague and conclusory allegations do not state a claim)
- Lopez v. Smith, 203 F.3d 1122 (9th Cir. 2000) (en banc) (leave to amend should be granted when pleading deficiencies can be cured)