Reported / Citable
Background
Bradley Thomas Boone sued under 42 U.S.C. § 405(g), alleging that the Social Security Administration had failed to comply with a prior federal remand order in an earlier case. He sought review of an unfavorable agency decision dated December 17, 2020.
The same magistrate judge had previously reviewed and affirmed that December 17, 2020 decision in Boone v. Saul. The Fifth Circuit later affirmed, holding that the Commissioner’s decision faithfully adhered to the district court’s remand order.
The Court’s Holding
Magistrate Judge Andrew M. Edison recommended that the action be dismissed sua sponte on res judicata grounds. Boone had already received district-court review of the same agency decision, followed by affirmance from the Fifth Circuit.
Although res judicata ordinarily is an affirmative defense that must be pleaded, the recommendation applied the exception permitting a court to raise the doctrine on its own when both actions were brought before the same court. A second § 405(g) complaint could not obtain a second consideration of the same jurisdictional claims.
Key Takeaways
- A claimant cannot relitigate the same Social Security decision through a new § 405(g) complaint after prior federal review has been affirmed.
- A district court may raise res judicata sua sponte when the prior and current actions were filed in the same court.
- The memorandum and recommendation gave the parties 14 days to file written objections.
Why It Matters
The recommendation underscores the finality of federal judicial review in Social Security cases. Recasting a challenge as an enforcement claim does not permit renewed review when the claimant seeks to revisit the same agency decision already upheld by the district court and court of appeals.