Rodriquez v. Astrue
This text of 301 F. App'x 723 (Rodriquez v. Astrue) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
MEMORANDUM
Diego M. Rodriquez appeals pro se from the district court’s judgment dismissing his action against the Social Security Administration for lack of subject matter jurisdiction. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 [724]*724U.S.C. § 1291. We review de novo, Kildare v. Saenz, 325 F.3d 1078, 1082 (9th Cir.2003), and we affirm.
The district court properly dismissed the action without prejudice because Rodriquez failed to exhaust administrative remedies prior to seeking judicial review. See 42 U.S.C. § 405(g) (providing that an individual may seek judicial review after “any final decision of the Commissioner of Social Security”); see also Califano v. Sanders, 430 U.S. 99, 101-02, 97 S.Ct. 980, 51 L.Ed.2d 192 (1977) (explaining that a claimant must exhaust his administrative remedies by completing a four-step administrative review process prior to federal judicial review).
Because we affirm the district court’s dismissal based on lack of subject matter jurisdiction, we do not consider Rodriquez’s contentions on the merits.
AFFIRMED.
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
301 F. App'x 723, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/rodriquez-v-astrue-ca9-2008.