Fine v. Saul
- Haywood Gilliam
- 4:19-cv-06329
- U.S. District Court · Northern District of California
- 2
In Fine v. Saul, Judge Gilliam granted dismissal because Fine missed the required hearing and had not exhausted administrative procedures.
Kenneth Fine’s case was dismissed for lack of subject-matter jurisdiction, and the court ordered the case closed.
What happened
In Fine v. Saul, Kenneth Fine challenged actions by the Social Security Administration after it determined that his disability had ended.
Fine requested a hearing after the agency upheld that determination, but he did not attend the scheduled hearing. The administrative law judge dismissed his hearing request, and the Appeals Council upheld that dismissal.
Judge Haywood S. Gilliam, Jr. granted the Secretary’s motion to dismiss for lack of jurisdiction because Fine had not completed the required administrative process. The court ordered the case closed.
The detailed version
- Fine v. Saul · No. 4:19-cv-06329
- Haywood Gilliam
- Mar. 17, 2020
Background
The Social Security Administration notified Kenneth Fine that his disability had ended in August 2015. The agency affirmed that decision on reconsideration in July 2017. Fine requested a hearing on September 29, 2017.
After several attempts to provide Fine with a hearing notice, he acknowledged receiving the notice on April 1, 2019, and confirmed that he would attend the May 30, 2019 hearing. Fine did not appear. The administrative law judge dismissed his request for a hearing, and the Appeals Council confirmed that dismissal on August 30, 2019.
Fine filed this civil action without a lawyer on October 3, 2019, challenging the agency’s actions. The Secretary moved to dismiss under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(1), which concerns the court’s subject-matter jurisdiction.
Court’s Analysis
The court held that Fine had not exhausted the procedures required by the Social Security Act. The court explained that judicial review under 42 U.S.C. § 405(g) is limited to a final agency decision made after a hearing. Because Fine did not attend the scheduled hearing, he did not complete the administrative process required for judicial review. The court also noted that Fine did not respond to its order requiring him to explain why the motion to dismiss should not be granted.
Ruling
Judge Haywood S. Gilliam, Jr. granted the Secretary’s motion to dismiss for lack of jurisdiction. The clerk was instructed to close the case. The opinion does not state that the court reached the merits of Fine’s challenge to the agency’s disability determination.
Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.