Brown v. Dudek

4 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 5 DISTRICT OF NEVADA ZENIA BROWN, Case No. 2:25-cv-00383-JCM-NJK 8 Plaintiff, Order v. LELAND DUDEK, 11 Defendant.

12 On March 5, 2025, the Court screened Plaintiff’s original complaint and dismissed it with leave to amend. Docket No. 8. On March 8, 2025, Plaintiff filed an amended complaint.

14 Docket No. 9. The Court herein screens that amended complaint pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2).

16 I. Standards 17 When a party seeks permission to pursue a civil case in forma pauperis, courts will screen the complaint. See 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e). A central function of this screening process is to “discourage the filing of, and waste of judicial and private resources upon, baseless lawsuits that paying litigants generally do not initiate because of the cost of bringing suit.” Neitzke v. Williams, 490 U.S. 319, 327 (1989).

22 With respect to social security appeals specifically, judges in this District have outlined some basic requirements for complaints to satisfy the Court’s screening. First, the complaint must establish that administrative remedies were exhausted pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 405(g), and that the civil action was commenced within 60 days after notice of a final decision. Second, the complaint must indicate the judicial district in which the plaintiff resides. Third, the complaint must state the nature of the plaintiff’s disability and when the plaintiff claims to have become disabled. Fourth, the complaint must identify the nature of the plaintiff’s disagreement with the determination made 1} by the Social Security Administration and show that the plaintiff is entitled to relief. See, e.g., 2\| Graves v. Colvin, 2015 WL 357121, *2 (D. Nev. Jan. 26, 2015) (collecting cases).

3 The Court has reviewed the amended complaint and finds the amended complaint sufficient 4] to survive screening.

5 II. Conclusion 6 Accordingly, the Court hereby ORDERS as follows: 7 1. The Clerk of Court is INSTRUCTED to file the amended complaint.

8 2. The Clerk must provide notice of this action to the Commissioner pursuant to Rule 3 9 of the Supplemental Rules for Social Security.

10 IT IS SO ORDERED.

11 Dated: May 5, 2025 2 Yo fo.

Nancy JKoppe 13 United-States, Magistrate Judge 26 ' New rules govern social security cases, which provide in pertinent part that the plaintiff “may” provide a short and plain statement of the grounds for relief. Supp. R. Soc. Sec. 2(b)(2).

27| In the context of an in forma pauperis screening, however, a social security plaintiff must still provide a sufficient explanation as to her contentions on appeal. Jalal H. v. Comm’r of Soc. Sec., 28] 2023 WL 35218, at *2 (S.D. Cal. Jan. 4, 2023).