Opinion
No. 12-15689 D.C. No. 2:11-cv-01843-JCM-CWH
07-24-2013
RAYMOND LEE, Plaintiff - Appellant, v. SOCIAL SECURITY ADMINISTRATION, Defendant - Appellee.
NOT FOR PUBLICATION
MEMORANDUM
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the District of Nevada
James C. Mahan, District Judge, Presiding
Before: ALARCÓN, CLIFTON, and CALLAHAN, Circuit Judges.
Raymond Lee appeals pro se from the district court's judgment dismissing for lack of subject matter jurisdiction his action challenging the Social Security Administration's determination of the onset date of his disability. We review de novo a dismissal under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2), Barren v. Harrington, 152 F.3d 1193, 1194 (9th Cir. 1998) (order), and we affirm.
The district court properly dismissed the action for lack of subject matter jurisdiction because Lee neither obtained a final decision before filing the action, nor stated a colorable constitutional claim. See Subia v. Comm'r of Soc. Sec., 264 F.3d 899, 901 (9th Cir. 2001) (explaining that the Social Security Act limits judicial review to final decisions unless there is a colorable constitutional claim); Matlock v. Sullivan, 908 F.2d 492, 493 (9th Cir. 1990) (the denial of an untimely petition for review is not final decision).
AFFIRMED.