Narrative Opinion Summary
John D. Jenkins appeals the dismissal of his damages action against the Social Security Administration, claiming inaccuracies in the calculation of his benefits. The appeal is under the jurisdiction of 28 U.S.C. 1291, and the court reviews the dismissal de novo. The Ninth Circuit affirms the district court's decision, stating that Jenkins' action is barred by 42 U.S.C. 405(h) due to his failure to exhaust administrative remedies. The court also notes that Jenkins cannot bypass this requirement by framing his claim as a civil rights violation. The decision is affirmed, and the disposition is not for publication, restricting its citation under Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.
Legal Issues Addressed
Citation Restriction under Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3subscribe to see similar legal issues
Application: The decision is not published and its citation is restricted under Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.
Reasoning: The decision is affirmed, and the disposition is not for publication, restricting its citation under Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.
Civil Rights Claim Framingsubscribe to see similar legal issues
Application: Jenkins cannot avoid the requirement of exhausting administrative remedies by characterizing his claim as a civil rights violation.
Reasoning: The court also notes that Jenkins cannot bypass this requirement by framing his claim as a civil rights violation.
Exhaustion of Administrative Remedies under 42 U.S.C. 405(h)subscribe to see similar legal issues
Application: The court affirms the dismissal of the action because Jenkins did not exhaust administrative remedies, as required by 42 U.S.C. 405(h).
Reasoning: The Ninth Circuit affirms the district court's decision, stating that Jenkins' action is barred by 42 U.S.C. 405(h) due to his failure to exhaust administrative remedies.
Jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. 1291subscribe to see similar legal issues
Application: The court has jurisdiction to review the dismissal of the damages action under 28 U.S.C. 1291.
Reasoning: The appeal is under the jurisdiction of 28 U.S.C. 1291, and the court reviews the dismissal de novo.