Nunez v. Commission of Social Security

Background

Javier Nunez filed this self-represented action seeking judicial review of the Commissioner of Social Security’s decision denying his application for disability benefits under the Social Security Act. The opinion states that Nunez alleged he resides in Brooklyn, in Kings County, New York.

Venue analysis

The court explained that a Social Security benefits-review action under 42 U.S.C. §§ 405(g) or 1383(c)(3) may be brought only in the federal district where the plaintiff resides or has a principal place of business, or, if neither is in a federal judicial district, in the District of Columbia. Because Nunez alleged that he resides in Brooklyn and did not allege a principal place of business, the Southern District of New York was not the proper venue. Kings County is within the Eastern District of New York.

The court also addressed any constitutional claims or request for a writ of mandamus. It explained that the general federal venue law permits an action against a federal agency or federal official to be filed where the plaintiff resides when no real property is involved. The court therefore found the Eastern District of New York to be a proper venue for those claims as well.

Ruling and disposition

Under 28 U.S.C. § 1406(a), the court transferred this action to the United States District Court for the Eastern District of New York. The court did not decide whether the denial of disability benefits was legally correct. It directed the Clerk to transfer the action, stated that the transferee court would decide whether Nunez could proceed without paying fees, directed that no summons issue from the Southern District, closed the case in that court, and terminated all pending motions.

The court also certified under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(3) that an appeal from the order would not be taken in good faith and denied permission to appeal without paying fees. The opinion recounts that Nunez is already barred from filing certain new civil actions without first obtaining court permission, but states that this case does not fall within those categories. Judge Laura Taylor Swain warned that continued Social Security filings in an improper venue, or other duplicative, frivolous, or meritless litigation, could lead the court to require Nunez to explain why he should not be barred from filing any action without paying fees in that court unless he first obtains permission.