Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
←Back to docket
S.D.N.Y.Procedural orderFiled Feb. 18, 2020

Walker v. Commissioner of Social Security

Judge
Paul Engelmayer
Docket
1:18-cv-09437
Court
U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
Pages
2
Social SecurityCivil ProcedureMotion to Dismiss
In one sentence

In Walker v. Commissioner of Social Security, Judge Engelmayer granted the Commissioner’s motion to dismiss because Walker had not exhausted agency remedies.

Who this affects

Ronald B. Walker’s Social Security action against the Commissioner of Social Security was dismissed, and the case was closed.

What happened

In Walker v. Commissioner of Social Security, the Commissioner asked the court to dismiss Ronald B. Walker’s case for lack of subject-matter jurisdiction.

A magistrate judge recommended granting the motion because Walker had not obtained a final agency decision or completed the required administrative process. Neither party objected to that recommendation.

Judge Paul A. Engelmayer found no clear error, adopted the recommendation in full, granted the motion to dismiss, directed the Clerk to close the case, and stated that the parties’ failure to object waived appellate review.

The detailed version

For law students, journalists, and other readers who want the full reasoning

Case
Walker v. Commissioner of Social Security · No. 1:18-cv-09437
Judge
Paul Engelmayer
Date
Feb. 18, 2020

Background

The Commissioner of Social Security moved under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(1) to dismiss Ronald B. Walker’s action for lack of subject-matter jurisdiction. Magistrate Judge Sarah L. Cave issued a Report and Recommendation on January 24, 2020, recommending that the motion be granted because Walker had not obtained a final decision from the agency and had not exhausted his administrative remedies. The district court incorporated the Report’s factual summary by reference.

Court’s reasoning

Because neither party filed objections, Judge Engelmayer reviewed the Report for clear error—a plainly apparent mistake in the record. He found no facial error in the Report’s conclusions and adopted it in its entirety. The court also stated that the parties’ failure to object, after being warned of the consequence, waived appellate review.

Result

The court granted the Commissioner’s motion to dismiss. It directed the Clerk to mail Walker a copy of the decision at the address on file and close the case. The opinion does not add a “with prejudice” or “without prejudice” designation.

The authoritative version

Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.

Open opinion PDF →
Summary written with AI assistance. See how summaries are made. Spot something wrong? Tell us.