Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
←Back to docket
S.D.N.Y.Procedural orderFiled Dec. 8, 2020

Martinez v. Commissioner of Social Security

Judge
Edgardo Ramos
Docket
1:20-cv-10251
Court
U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
Pages
2
Social SecurityCivil ProcedurePro Se
In one sentence

In Martinez v. Commissioner, Judge Ramos transferred Damien Martinez’s disability-benefits review case to the Eastern District of New York because venue was improper.

Who this affects

Damien Martinez, whose Social Security review case was transferred from the Southern District of New York to the Eastern District of New York; the transferee court will decide whether he may proceed without paying fees.

What happened

Martinez v. Commissioner of Social Security concerns Damien Martinez’s request for review of the denial of his disability-benefits application. He brought the case without a lawyer in the Southern District of New York.

Martinez alleged that he lived in Queens, New York. The court explained that Social Security review cases must generally be filed where the plaintiff lives, and Queens is in the Eastern District of New York.

Judge Ramos transferred the case to the Eastern District of New York under the federal venue statute. The Southern District closed its case, did not issue a summons, and left any decision about allowing Martinez to proceed without paying fees to the receiving court.

The detailed version

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

Case
Martinez v. Commissioner of Social Security · No. 1:20-cv-10251
Judge
Edgardo Ramos
Date
Dec. 8, 2020

Background

Damien Martinez brought this action without a lawyer to seek judicial review of the Commissioner of Social Security’s decision denying his application for disability benefits. He invoked 42 U.S.C. §§ 405(g) and/or 1383(c)(3), the provisions governing judicial review of Social Security decisions.

Venue analysis

The court explained that a Social Security review action may be filed only in the federal judicial district where the plaintiff resides or has a principal place of business. If the plaintiff has neither within a federal district, the statute permits filing in the District of Columbia.

Martinez alleged that he resides in Queens, New York. The court found that his residence was not in the Southern District of New York and that he made no allegation about a principal place of business. Because Queens is within the Eastern District of New York, the court concluded that venue was improper in the Southern District and that venue lay in the Eastern District.

Ruling

Judge Edgardo Ramos ordered the case transferred to the United States District Court for the Eastern District of New York under 28 U.S.C. § 1406(a), which permits transfer when venue is improper. The Clerk was directed to transfer the action, and the Southern District stated that the transfer closed the case there. The court also stated that a summons would not issue from the Southern District and that the receiving court would decide whether Martinez could proceed without paying fees. The court certified that an appeal would not be taken in good faith and denied permission to appeal without paying fees.

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.