Tsarelka v. Apfel
Tsarelka v. Apfel
Opinion
[NOT FOR PUBLICATION–NOT TO BE CITED AS PRECEDENT]
United States Court of Appeals For the First Circuit
No. 00-1213
LISA TSARELKA,
Plaintiff, Appellant,
v.
KENNETH S. APFEL,
Defendant, Appellee.
APPEAL FROM THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF MASSACHUSETTS
[Hon. Mark L. Wolf, U.S. District Judge]
Before
Torruella, Chief Judge, Stahl and Lynch, Circuit Judges.
Lisa Tsarelka on brief pro se. Donald K. Stern, United States Attorney, and Anita Johnson, Assistant United States Attorney, on brief for appellee.
October 3, 2000 Per Curiam. Appellant Lisa Tsarelka appeals from
the dismissal of her complaint. The district court
dismissed the complaint, by endorsement, based on the
reasons set out in the motion to dismiss filed by appellee,
Kenneth S. Apfel, the Commissioner of Social Security.
There was no error in the action of the district court and
the court's judgment is affirmed for essentially the reasons
set out in the motion to dismiss.
We add only that despite appellant's arguments to
the contrary, she has submitted no evidence that she ever
had presented her claim regarding the termination of her
Supplemental Security Income (SSI) benefits to an
administrative law judge (ALJ) or the Appeals Council.
Neither the ALJ nor the Council ever addressed such a claim.
Further, the Appeals Council's reference to the amount of
appellant's resources was made in a particular, limited
context. That is, this reference was made to explain the
Council's opinion that, given the little money appellant had
at her disposal in May 1997, repayment of $3,378 would not
further the purpose of the SSI program. Significantly, the
-2- Appeals Council did not make the comment in relation to the
question whether appellant qualified for SSI benefits.
Affirmed. See Local Rule 27(c).
-3-
Reference
- Status
- Published