Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
←Back to docket
S.D.N.Y.Procedural orderFiled Sept. 24, 2021

Del Rio v. Saul

Judge
Paul Engelmayer
Docket
1:20-cv-07792
Court
U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
Pages
2
Social SecurityMotion to DismissCivil Procedure
In one sentence

In Del Rio v. Saul, Judge Engelmayer granted the Commissioner’s motion to dismiss without prejudice because Del Rio had not exhausted administrative remedies.

Who this affects

Joey Del Rio’s Social Security judicial-review case was dismissed without prejudice; the Commissioner’s motion to dismiss was granted.

What happened

In Del Rio v. Saul, Joey Del Rio asked the federal court to review the Social Security Administration’s denial of Supplemental Security Income. The Commissioner asked the court to dismiss the case.

A magistrate judge recommended granting the dismissal because Del Rio had not completed the required administrative process. Neither side objected to that recommendation, so the district court reviewed it for clear error.

Judge Engelmayer adopted the recommendation and granted the motion to dismiss without prejudice. He also directed the Clerk of Court to close the case and terminate the pending motion.

The detailed version

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

Case
Del Rio v. Saul · No. 1:20-cv-07792
Judge
Paul Engelmayer
Date
Sept. 24, 2021

Background

Joey Del Rio brought an action under Section 405(g) of the Social Security Act seeking judicial review of a decision denying him Supplemental Security Income. The Commissioner of the Social Security Administration moved to dismiss under Rule 12(b)(6), which allows dismissal when a complaint does not adequately state a claim.

Report and Recommendation

Magistrate Judge Katharine H. Parker recommended granting the motion because Del Rio had failed to exhaust his administrative remedies, meaning he had not completed the required administrative process before seeking judicial review. The opinion also notes that, for the reasons discussed in the report, there had been no qualifying final administrative decision.

Neither Del Rio nor the Commissioner objected to the report. The district court therefore reviewed the report for clear error rather than conducting a full reconsideration. The court found no clear error and adopted the report in full.

Ruling

Judge Paul A. Engelmayer granted the motion to dismiss without prejudice. The Clerk of Court was directed to terminate the motion at docket entry 18 and close the case. The opinion states that failure to object to the report waived appellate review.

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.