Tejada v. Commissioner of Social Security
- Laura Swain
- 1:24-cv-10068
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 4
In Tejada v. Commissioner of Social Security, Judge Swain denied Tejada’s motions, kept this action closed, and directed filings to the related case.
Reberto A. Tejada, whose Rule 60(b) motions were denied and whose Social Security-related filings were directed to the related action; the Commissioner of Social Security and the other named defendants were not required to respond in this closed action.
What happened
In Tejada v. Commissioner of Social Security, Reberto A. Tejada filed numerous documents after the court closed this action and moved his related Social Security claims into an earlier case. The court treated the documents as requests to reopen or obtain relief from its order.
The court denied all of Tejada’s motions. It found that his submissions did not show any of the listed grounds for relief under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 60(b), including mistake, newly discovered evidence, misconduct, or a void judgment. It also found no extraordinary circumstances supporting relief for another reason.
Judge Swain directed Tejada to submit future filings concerning his Social Security claims in the related case, kept this action closed, and ordered that no summons issue here. The court also denied permission to proceed without paying appeal fees because it certified that an appeal would not be taken in good faith.
The detailed version
- Tejada v. Commissioner of Social Security · No. 1:24-cv-10068
- Laura Swain
- Feb. 11, 2025
Background
Reberto A. Tejada filed this pro se action seeking, among other things, review of a Social Security Administration decision concerning his entitlement to disability insurance benefits. Because he had already brought an action raising the same claims, the court refiled this complaint as a supplemental complaint in that earlier related proceeding. On January 17, 2025, the court directed that this action be closed without prejudice to Tejada’s claims proceeding in the related case.
After the case was closed, Tejada filed numerous applications and other documents. The court liberally construed those submissions as motions for relief under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 60(b), which allows a party to seek relief from a court order or judgment for specified reasons, including mistake, newly discovered evidence, misconduct, a void judgment, satisfaction of the judgment, or other extraordinary reasons.
Ruling
The court denied Tejada’s motions, identified as ECF Nos. 9–18 and 20–27. It concluded that the submissions did not demonstrate any ground for relief under the first five clauses of Rule 60(b). To the extent Tejada sought relief under Rule 60(b)(6), the court also denied the motions because he had not shown the extraordinary circumstances required for that provision.
The court directed that all further filings concerning Tejada’s current challenge to Social Security Administration determinations be submitted in the related action. It directed the Clerk of Court to terminate all motions in this action, stated that the action was closed, and ordered that no summonses issue under this docket number.
Appeal and filing status
The court certified under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(3) that any appeal from the order would not be taken in good faith. It therefore denied permission to appeal without paying the required fees. The opinion gives inconsistent docket numbers for the related action: it identifies the earlier proceeding as No. 24-CV-04852 in the background, but the conclusion directs filings to No. 24-CV-0452.
Read the full 4-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.