Lee v. Commissioner of Social Security
- Virginia Demarchi
- 5:21-cv-03883
- U.S. District Court · Northern District of California
- 3
In Lee v. Kijakazi, Judge Demarchi granted Kijakazi’s motion to dismiss because Lee’s continuing-benefits claim was moot.
Cathrine R. Lee’s claim for continued disability insurance and supplemental security income benefits while her request for reconsideration was pending; the court dismissed that claim and closed the file.
What happened
In Cathrine R. Lee v. Kilolo Kijakazi, the Social Security Administration stopped Lee’s disability insurance and supplemental security income benefits after a continuing disability review. Lee asked the agency to reconsider and sued, alleging that it had not provided benefits while reconsideration was pending.
The Commissioner submitted evidence that Lee received two retroactive payments and then continued receiving monthly benefits until the agency denied reconsideration. Lee did not respond to the motion or dispute that evidence. The court concluded that she had received all the relief she requested, so her claim was moot, meaning there was no longer a live dispute for the court to decide.
Judge Virginia K. Demarchi granted the Commissioner’s motion to dismiss for lack of subject-matter jurisdiction and directed the Clerk to close the file.
The detailed version
- Lee v. Commissioner of Social Security · No. 5:21-cv-03883
- Virginia Demarchi
- Dec. 5, 2022
Background
Cathrine R. Lee had been receiving disability insurance benefits and supplemental security income benefits since 2010. After a continuing disability review completed on February 21, 2021, the Commissioner terminated her benefits. Lee requested reconsideration on March 31, 2021, and also made an untimely request for continued benefits while reconsideration was pending. She filed this action on May 24, 2021, alleging that the Commissioner repeatedly failed to respond to her requests to reinstate her benefits.
In an earlier ruling, the court treated Lee’s complaint as asserting two claims: an unreasonable-delay claim and a claim for continued benefits during reconsideration. The court dismissed the unreasonable-delay claim with leave to amend, but denied dismissal of the continuing-benefits claim because the Commissioner had not provided enough evidence at that time to show that Lee was receiving those benefits. Lee did not amend her complaint by the deadline.
Second Motion to Dismiss
The Commissioner filed a second motion to dismiss the continuing-benefits claim for lack of subject-matter jurisdiction. The Commissioner argued that Lee’s claim was moot because she had received all benefits to which she was entitled while reconsideration was pending.
The court treated this as a factual challenge to subject-matter jurisdiction. That type of challenge allows the court to consider evidence outside the complaint. The Commissioner submitted a declaration from an agency claims specialist stating that the agency paid Lee $4,614 and $1,714 on September 17, 2021, and October 1, 2021. The declaration stated that these payments represented benefits retroactive to the month when her benefits had ceased. It also stated that Lee then received $956.19 per month until the agency denied her reconsideration request on September 15, 2022. Lee did not respond to the motion or contest these facts.
Ruling
The court found that Lee had received all the relief she requested. Because no live dispute remained, the court found that the continuing-benefits claim was moot and therefore lacked a basis for subject-matter jurisdiction. Judge Virginia K. Demarchi granted the Commissioner’s motion to dismiss for lack of subject-matter jurisdiction. The Clerk of Court was directed to close the file.
Read the full 3-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.