Simmons v. The USA Department of Health, Education and Welfare

• Court: District Court, N.D. California
• Decided: May 31, 2023
• Docket: 3:22-cv-04760
• Status: Unknown

Opinion

1 2 3 4 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 5 NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 6 7 MELVIN JOSEPH SIMMONS, et al., Case No. 22-cv-04760-TLT

8 Plaintiffs, ORDER OF DISMISSAL AND 9 v. DENYING IN FORMA PAUPERIS STATUS 10 THE USA DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH, EDUCATION AND WELFARE, et al., 11 Defendants.

12 13 Plaintiff Melvin Simmons, an inmate at California Correctional Institution (“CCI”), and his 14 mother Laura Simmons filed a pro se action against the USA Department of Health, Education 15 and Welfare and the Commissioner of the Social Security Administration (SSA). The Court 16 previously dismissed Laura Simmons as a party and ordered plaintiff to show cause why his 17 complaint, which he sought to file in forma pauperis, should not be dismissed pursuant to 28 18 U.S.C. § 1915(g). Dkt. No. 16. Plaintiff subsequently paid the filing fee. Dkt. No. 21. His 19 motion to proceed in forma pauperis is therefore DENIED. Dkt. No. 12. His complaint (Dkt. No. 20 10) is now before the Court for review under 28 U.S.C. § 1915A. The complaint will be 21 dismissed. 22 DISCUSSION 23 A. Standard of Review 24 A federal court must conduct a preliminary screening in any case in which a prisoner seeks 25 redress from a governmental entity or officer or employee of a governmental entity. See 28 U.S.C. 26 § 1915A(a). In its review, the court must identify any cognizable claims and dismiss any claims 27 that are frivolous, malicious, fail to state a claim upon which relief may be granted or seek 1 (2). Pro se pleadings must, however, be liberally construed. See United States v. Qazi, 975 F.3d 2 989, 993 (9th Cir. 2020). 3 Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 8(a)(2) requires only “a short and plain statement of the 4 claim showing that the pleader is entitled to relief.” Fed. R. Civ. P. 8(a)(2). “Specific facts are not 5 necessary; the statement need only “‘give the defendant fair notice of what the . . . claim is and the 6 grounds upon which it rests.’” Erickson v. Pardus, 551 U.S. 89, 93 (2007) (citations omitted). 7 While Rule 8 does not require detailed factual allegations, it demands more than an unadorned, 8 the-defendant-unlawfully-harmed-me accusation. Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 556 U.S. 662, 677-78 (2009). 9 A pleading that offers only labels and conclusions, or a formulaic recitation of the elements of a 10 cause of action, or naked assertions devoid of further factual enhancement does not suffice. Id. 11 B. Analysis 12 Plaintiff has failed to state a claim upon which relief can be granted. The first-named 13 defendant, the USA Department of Health, Education and Welfare, was the precursor to the 14 Department of Health and Human Services and no longer exists.1 Although the Commissioner of 15 the Social Security Administration is an appropriate defendant, plaintiff’s complaint is in large 16 part incomprehensible and does not give notice of the type of claim and the facts upon which it 17 rests. 18 The caption identifies the suing party as “CDC No. D66671 Simmons Melvin Jr. . . . the 19 Deceased Personality Dead Pledged Without Prior Written Consent or Full Informed Partici 20 Patron, Unauthorized Use to Defeat the Realm Realty Melvin Joseph Simmons of the Aggrieved 21 Person Melvin Joseph Simmons Absoluted Perfect Title.” Dkt. No. 10 at 1. The complaint states 22 that it is an “action to review” the defendants’ “failure to deter or prevent actual fraud.” Id. 23 Plaintiff seeks to “return to the World, to dwell secure in full life.” Id. at 2. He suggests that he is 24 “civilly dead” and “is considered to have left this temporal world for the nonexistence by false 25 imprisonment under the false pretenses of the deceased personality’s name Melvin Simmons Jr.” 26 1 See “United States Department of Health, Education and Welfare Records,” the John F. Kennedy 27 Presidential Library and Museum Archives, https://www.jfklibrary.org/asset- 1 Id. at 4. He alleges that defendants “convey[ed] plaintiff Melvin Joseph Simmons ownership, 2 rights, and benefits to plaintiff Melvin Joseph Simmons half-blood Brothers’ legal personality 3 name Melvin Simmons Jr. outside of the usual ordinary course of a business transaction.” Id. at 7. 4 He alleges that the Social Security Administration Commissioner caused him to “suffer loss of 5 amenities, loss of life enjoyment, loss of life, liberty, Civil Rights Such as the Right to Vote, To 6 Make and Enforce Contracts, To Sue, Be Parties, Give Evidence, and To The Full and Equal 7 Benefit of All Laws and Proceedings For the Security of Persons and Property As Is Enjoyed By 8 White Citizens.” Id. 9 Plaintiff appears to seek release from prison, compensatory damages, and punitive 10 damages. Id. at 25-26. 11 To the extent plaintiff intends to challenge the suspension of social security benefits while 12 he is incarcerated, he does not state a claim upon which relief can be granted. A prisoner 13 convicted of a felony is not entitled to social security benefits. See 42 U.S.C. § 402(x). Section 14 402(x) is constitutional and does not violate the rights of prisoners. See Butler v. Apfel, 144 F.3d 15 622, 625-27 (9th Cir. 1998). While a dissatisfied Social Security claimant may seek judicial 16 review in federal district court, including review of constitutional claims—see Schweiker v. 17 Chilicky, 487 U.S. 412, 424 (1988)—he may not seek damages from officials responsible for 18 unconstitutional conduct that leads to the wrongful denial of benefits. See id. at 420-29 (improper 19 denial of Social Security benefits cannot give rise to cause of action under Bivens v. Six Unknown 20 Fed. Narcotics Agents, 403 U.S. 388 (1971) for money damages). 21 Plaintiff cannot challenge the validity of his criminal conviction, sentence, or confinement 22 in any manner other than by filing a petition for writ of habeas corpus. Habeas is the “exclusive 23 remedy” for the prisoner who seeks “‘immediate or speedier release’” from confinement. Skinner 24 v. Switzer, 562 U.S. 521, 533-34 (2011) 25 CONCLUSION 26 For the foregoing reasons, the case is DISMISSED for failure to state a claim upon which 27 relief may be granted. The Clerk shall enter judgment and close the file. 1 IT IS SO ORDERED. 2 Dated: May 30, 2023 3

oe, f Yer 5 United States District Judge 6 7 8 9 10 11 12

Z 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28