Yaneilis R. v. Commissioner of Social Security
- 1:24-cv-04823
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 2
In Yaneilis R. v. Commissioner of Social Security, the court denied review, affirmed the benefits denial, and dismissed the case.
Yaneilis R.’s request for Social Security benefits was denied, the Commissioner’s decision was affirmed, and the case was dismissed and closed.
What happened
Yaneilis R. v. Commissioner of Social Security concerned Yaneilis R.’s request for review of the Commissioner’s denial of benefits. The court’s judgment states that Yaneilis R. did not timely ask the Appeals Council to review the administrative law judge’s decision.
The court also stated that the Appeals Council did not abuse its discretion in finding that Yaneilis R. had not shown good cause for the late filing. The judgment additionally identified failure to prosecute, failure to respond to court orders, and failure to keep an updated mailing address as reasons supporting dismissal.
The court denied Yaneilis R.’s request for review, affirmed the Commissioner’s denial of benefits, and dismissed the case. The court entered final judgment for the Commissioner and closed the case.
The detailed version
- Yaneilis R. v. Commissioner of Social Security · No. 1:24-cv-04823
- June 16, 2025
Background
Yaneilis R. sought judicial review of the Commissioner of Social Security’s denial of benefits. The judgment refers to an administrative law judge (ALJ) decision and to the Appeals Council, which reviews certain ALJ decisions within the Social Security process.
Reasoning
The court stated that Yaneilis R. did not timely request Appeals Council review of the ALJ’s denial of benefits. It further stated that the Appeals Council did not abuse its discretion—a legal standard asking whether the agency acted outside the bounds of reasonable decision-making—in deciding that Yaneilis R. had not established good cause for the late filing.
The court also stated that dismissal was independently supported by Yaneilis R.’s failure to prosecute the case, respond to court orders, and maintain an updated mailing address with the court. The judgment says the decision was substantially based on the reasons in the Commissioner’s brief, identified as Docket No. 32.
Disposition
The court denied Yaneilis R.’s request for review, affirmed the Commissioner’s denial of benefits, and dismissed the case. It entered final judgment in favor of the Commissioner and closed the case. The judgment does not state that the dismissal was with or without prejudice.
Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.