Kimmons v. Kijakazi

Background

Branlett Eugene Kimmons filed this action seeking judicial review of a decision by the Commissioner of Social Security. He represented himself. The Commissioner moved to dismiss under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(1), which allows dismissal for lack of subject-matter jurisdiction—the court’s legal power to hear a case.

Kimmons did not respond to the motion at first. Instead, he filed a notice of appeal stating that he sought review of a scheduling order. The Ninth Circuit dismissed that appeal for lack of jurisdiction because the district court had not issued a final or appealable order. After the district court ordered Kimmons to respond and then to explain why the case should not be dismissed for failure to prosecute, Kimmons said he sought review of a January 5, 2023 decision granting his application for supplemental security income.

Court’s Analysis

The court explained that the Social Security Act permits judicial review of a final decision by the Commissioner. It does not permit review of agency actions taken before a final decision. Kimmons’s lawsuit was filed more than five months before the January 5 decision he identified.

The court also explained that an Administrative Law Judge’s decision is not final for judicial-review purposes until the Appeals Council grants or denies review. Because the Appeals Council had not yet acted, the decision was not reviewable. The court further stated that subject-matter jurisdiction must exist when an action is filed, and that a court without jurisdiction must dismiss the case.

Disposition

The court granted the Commissioner’s motion to dismiss and dismissed the action for lack of subject-matter jurisdiction. The order stated that Kimmons had until March 3, 2023, to appeal to the Appeals Council and that he could seek review in the district court after the Appeals Council issued its decision. Judge Jacquelyn Corley ordered that the motion listed as Docket No. 10 was disposed of.