Glaude v. Commissioner of the Social Security Administration of the United…
Glaude v. Commissioner of the Social Security Administration of the United States
- Joseph Spero
- 3:24-cv-06884
- U.S. District Court · Northern District of California
- 2
In Glaude v. Commissioner, Judge Spero denied the Commissioner’s motion to dismiss, finding equitable tolling applied to the late disability-benefits complaint.
Alycia Rose Glaude’s challenge to the denial of disability benefits was not dismissed on filing-deadline grounds; the Commissioner’s motion to dismiss was denied.
What happened
Alycia Rose Glaude challenged the denial of her application for disability benefits under Title II of the Social Security Act. The Commissioner’s denial became final on July 25, 2024, and the complaint was due September 30, 2024, but Glaude filed it on October 1, 2024.
The Commissioner asked the court to dismiss the case because the complaint was late. Glaude’s lawyer submitted evidence of technical problems with the court’s electronic filing system and said the complaint was filed after business hours on the deadline date. The court found that extraordinary circumstances and diligent efforts justified extending the deadline through equitable tolling.
In Glaude v. Commissioner of the Social Security Administration of the United States, Judge Joseph C. Spero denied the motion to dismiss. The opinion addressed the filing deadline only and did not decide whether Glaude was entitled to disability benefits.
The detailed version
- Glaude v. Commissioner of the Social Security Administration of the United… · No. 3:24-cv-06884
- Joseph Spero
- Dec. 26, 2024
Background
Alycia Rose Glaude filed an action challenging the denial of her application for disability benefits under Title II of the Social Security Act. The Commissioner’s denial became final on July 25, 2024. Applying the relevant 60-day filing period, the presumed receipt date for the agency’s notice, and the rule extending weekend deadlines to the next business day, the court stated that the complaint was due September 30, 2024. Glaude filed the complaint on October 1, 2024.
Motion to dismiss
The Commissioner moved to dismiss the action based on the late filing. The Commissioner argued that the filing deadline was not jurisdictional but that Glaude was not entitled to equitable tolling because her counsel experienced technical difficulties with the court’s electronic filing system and waited until after business hours on the due date to file the complaint.
Equitable tolling is a legal rule that can extend a filing deadline when a party pursued her rights diligently and an extraordinary circumstance prevented timely filing. After reviewing counsel’s affidavit, the court found that extraordinary circumstances and overall diligence supported equitable tolling.
Ruling
The court denied the Commissioner’s motion to dismiss. The opinion did not decide the merits of Glaude’s challenge to the denial of disability benefits; it decided only whether the late filing should result in dismissal.
Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.