Skip to main content

ROSALES RODRIGUEZ v. BERRYHILL (2019)

Reset A A Font size: Print

United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit.

Maria Del Rosario ROSALES-RODRIGUEZ, Plaintiff-Appellant v. Nancy A. BERRYHILL, Acting Commissioner of Social Security; United States of America, Defendants-Appellees

No. 18-40532

Decided: January 29, 2019

Before JOLLY, COSTA, and HO, Circuit Judges. Elisabeth S. Brodyaga, Refugio del Rio Grande, San Benito, TX, Jaime M. Diez, Jones & Crane, Brownsville, TX, for Plaintiff-Appellant Nancy Lynn Masso, Assistant U.S. Attorney, U.S. Attorney's Office, Southern District of Texas, Brownsville, TX, for Defendants-Appellees

Ms. Rosales-Rodriguez appeals from, what she calls, a “front-desking” of her Social Security card application. Rosales brought a copy of her baptismal record, a letter from a priest at the church attesting to the document, and a Mexican voter identification card. The Social Security officer informed her that she needed to present original documents, or an alternative document from a list of acceptable documents in order to apply for a Social Security card. See 20 C.F.R. § 422.107(d). Rosales challenged this action as a final agency action, reviewable under the Administrative Procedures Act (the “APA”) and under 8 U.S.C. § 1503(a). The district court found there was no final agency action and dismissed the claim for lack of subject-matter jurisdiction.

Rosales acknowledged the documents she brought did not satisfy the necessary list and admitted there was a way to obtain an original baptism certificate. There was no agency action in this case, either formal or informal. Instead, the record shows that an employee declined to process an application without the necessary documents. Rosales did not attempt to return with alternative documents or an original or certified copy of her baptismal record. Such action is not a final action under either the APA or 8 U.S.C. § 1503(a).

We have reviewed the briefs, the applicable law, and relevant parts of the record. The district court committed no reversible error. The judgment is AFFIRMED.

FOOTNOTES

FOOTNOTE.  

PER CURIAM: * FN* Pursuant to 5th Cir. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5th Cir. R. 47.5.4.

Copied to clipboard