Summary
interpreting a pro se plaintiff's complaint "as if brought pursuant to section 405(g) rather than 42 U.S.C. § 1983"
Summary of this case from Tadeusz S. v. SaulOpinion
1:16-CV-919 (DNH/CFH)
03-15-2018
LINDELL TOWNSEND-WHITE, Plaintiff, v. SOCIAL SECURITY ADMINISTRATION, Defendant.
APPEARANCES: LINDELL TOWNSEND-WHITE Plaintiff pro se 260 South Pearl St. Apartment Unit 1F Albany, NY 12207
APPEARANCES: LINDELL TOWNSEND-WHITE
Plaintiff pro se
260 South Pearl St.
Apartment Unit 1F
Albany, NY 12207 DAVID N. HURD United States District Judge DECISION and ORDER
Pro se plaintiff Lindell Townsend-White brought this action against the Social Security Administration. On November 20, 2017, the Honorable Christian F. Hummel, United States Magistrate Judge, advised by Report-Recommendation that plaintiff's amended complaint be dismissed without prejudice and that plaintiff be permitted one final opportunity to file a second amended complaint to demonstrate that she has timely exhausted her administrative remedies. No objections to the Report-Recommendation have been filed.
Based upon a careful review of the entire file and the recommendations of the Magistrate Judge, the Report-Recommendation is accepted in whole. See 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1).
Therefore, it is
ORDERED that
1. Plaintiff's amended complaint is DISMISSED without prejudice and with leave to file a second amended complaint within thirty days of the date of this Decision and Order;
2. If plaintiff files a timely second amended complaint, it be forwarded to the Magistrate Judge for review; and
3. If plaintiff fails to file a second amended complaint within thirty days of the date of this Decision and Order, the Clerk dismiss this action without further order.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
/s/_________
United States District Judge Dated: March 15, 2018
Utica, New York.