Samboy Feliz v. Commissioner of Social Security
- Andrew Krause
- 7:19-cv-04226
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 1
In Carlos Juliosamboy Feliz v. Andrew Saul, Judge Krause reversed and remanded the Social Security case for further proceedings.
Carlos Juliosamboy Feliz and the Social Security Administration’s further handling of his claims; the Appeals Council must assign a different Administrative Law Judge, provide a new hearing opportunity, and issue a new decision.
What happened
Carlos Juliosamboy Feliz challenged the Commissioner of Social Security’s decision in federal court and raised a claim under the Constitution’s Appointments Clause.
The court reversed and remanded the action under a provision of the Social Security Act. The remand requires further administrative proceedings, including review by a different Administrative Law Judge, a new hearing opportunity, and a new decision.
In Carlos Juliosamboy Feliz v. Andrew Saul, Judge Krause ordered the remand based on the Supreme Court’s decision in Carr v. Saul, which allowed the plaintiff to raise the Appointments Clause claim for the first time in federal court.
The detailed version
- Samboy Feliz v. Commissioner of Social Security · No. 7:19-cv-04226
- Andrew Krause
- May 28, 2021
Background
Carlos Juliosamboy Feliz brought this action against Andrew Saul, identified in the caption as the Commissioner of Social Security. The judgment states that Feliz raised an Appointments Clause claim in federal court. The opinion text does not describe the underlying benefits decision or explain the other details of Feliz’s claims.
Court’s reasoning
The court relied on the Supreme Court’s decision in Carr v. Saul, 141 S. Ct. 1352 (2021). As described in the judgment, Carr held that a claimant did not have to raise an Appointments Clause claim before the Social Security Administration and could instead present it for the first time in federal court.
Ruling and effect
The court ordered that the action be reversed and remanded to the Commissioner under sentence four of 42 U.S.C. § 405(g) for further administrative proceedings. On remand, the Appeals Council must assign the case to a different Administrative Law Judge, provide Feliz an opportunity for a new hearing, and issue a new decision. The judgment is dated May 28, 2021.
Read the full 1-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.