King v. O'Malley

Background

Troy-Demond King sued Social Security Commissioner Martin O’Malley, challenging the denial of King’s applications for disability insurance benefits and supplemental security income. King applied in July 2022. The Social Security agency denied the claims in initial decisions issued in May 2023, and King requested reconsideration in June 2023. The request for reconsideration remained pending.

King’s complaint argued that the denial was not supported by medical findings or substantial evidence. He also alleged that the use of his name in capital letters involved prejudicial presumptions that violated his constitutional rights.

Motion to dismiss and exhaustion

O’Malley moved to dismiss under Rule 12(b)(6), which permits dismissal when a complaint does not state a legally sufficient claim. O’Malley argued that King had not exhausted the Social Security agency’s administrative review process because the agency had not issued either a reconsideration decision or a final decision.

The court explained that judicial review under the Social Security Act is generally available only after the Commissioner issues a final decision following the required administrative process. The court also considered whether King had raised a colorable constitutional claim—that is, a constitutional claim that was not wholly insubstantial, immaterial, or frivolous—that could excuse exhaustion. It concluded that King’s theory about the use of his name in capital letters was meritless and did not qualify.

Ruling

The court held that King had not exhausted his administrative remedies and therefore did not have a final decision ready for judicial review. Judge P. Casey Pitts granted O’Malley’s motion to dismiss without leave to amend. The dismissal was without prejudice to King pursuing a lawsuit challenging the denial if the denial becomes final and King exhausts his administrative remedies.