McIver v. Commissioner of Social Security
- John Cronan
- 1:19-cv-10264
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 2
In McIver v. Commissioner, Judge Cronan adopted a recommendation denying dismissal and dismissing the case without prejudice for lack of jurisdiction.
Tamicko Murray McIver’s Social Security benefits-review case was dismissed without prejudice for lack of subject-matter jurisdiction; the Commissioner’s motion to dismiss was denied.
What happened
In McIver v. Commissioner of Social Security, Tamicko Murray McIver, representing herself, sought review of an unfavorable decision about her Social Security benefits. The Commissioner moved to dismiss her amended complaint for failure to state a claim, and McIver did not oppose the motion.
A magistrate judge recommended denying the motion to dismiss but dismissing the case without prejudice because the court lacked subject-matter jurisdiction. No objections were filed, and the deadline passed. The opinion states that the parties therefore waived their right to object to the recommendation or obtain appellate review.
Judge John P. Cronan independently reviewed the recommendation and adopted it in its entirety. The motion to dismiss was denied, and the case was dismissed without prejudice for lack of subject-matter jurisdiction.
The detailed version
- McIver v. Commissioner of Social Security · No. 1:19-cv-10264
- John Cronan
- Jan. 29, 2021
Background
Tamicko Murray McIver, proceeding without a lawyer, brought this action under 42 U.S.C. § 405(g) seeking review of an unfavorable decision concerning her application for, or eligibility to receive, benefits under Title XVI or Title II of the Social Security Act. The Commissioner of Social Security moved to dismiss the amended complaint under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6), which concerns failure to state a legally sufficient claim. McIver did not file a response to the motion.
Report and Recommendation
Magistrate Judge Kevin Nathaniel Fox recommended that the motion to dismiss be denied and that the case be dismissed without prejudice for lack of subject-matter jurisdiction. The recommendation advised the parties that they had fourteen days to object and that failing to object would waive the right to object.
Review and Ruling
No objections were filed before the deadline. The court stated that the parties had therefore waived their right to object to the recommendation or obtain appellate review. Although McIver did not receive the recommendation because mail sent to her was returned as undeliverable, the court noted that she was responsible for keeping the court informed of her mailing address. Judge John P. Cronan nevertheless conducted a de novo review, meaning an independent review, and found the recommendation well reasoned and supported. The court adopted the Report and Recommendation in its entirety: the Commissioner’s motion to dismiss was denied, and the case was dismissed without prejudice for lack of subject-matter jurisdiction.
Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.