Opinion
Case No. 5:19-cv-01047-P
05-27-2020
LISA L. BROWN, Plaintiff, v. COMMISSIONER OF SOCIAL SECURITY ADMINISTRATION Defendant.
REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION
Plaintiff initiated this action seeking judicial review pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 405(g) of the final decision of Defendant Commissioner denying her application for disability insurance benefits under Title II of the Social Security Act, 42 U.S.C. §§ 401-34. Plaintiff has filed an Amended and Unopposed Motion to Transfer Venue Under 28 U.S.C. §§ 1404, 1406. Doc. No. 12. After reviewing the same, the undersigned recommends the Motion be granted and this matter be transferred to the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Oklahoma.
In her Motion, Plaintiff explains that she resided in Seminole County, Oklahoma at the time this action was filed on November 13, 2019. Venue for a Social Security case is addressed in 42 U.S.C. § 405(g), which provides:
Any individual, after any final decision of the Commissioner of Social Security made after a hearing to which he was a party, irrespective of the amount in controversy, may obtain a review of such decision by a civil action commenced within sixty days after the mailing to him of notice of such decision or within such further time as the Commissioner of Social Security may allow. Such action shall be brought in the district court of the United States for the judicial district in which the plaintiff resides, or has his principal place of business, or, if he does not reside or have his principal place of business within any such judicial district, in the United States District Court for the District of Columbia.(emphasis provided).
As noted, Plaintiff asserts that she lived in Seminole County, Oklahoma when this action was filed. The County of Seminole, State of Oklahoma is located within the Eastern District of Oklahoma. 28 U.S.C. § 116(b). Thus, venue is proper in that court, see 42 U.S.C. § 405(g), and Plaintiff's request to transfer this matter to the Eastern District should be granted.
The undersigned judicially notices the location of Seminole County, Oklahoma. See Fed. R. Evid. 201(b); see also United States v. Piggie, 622 F.2d 486, 488 (10th Cir. 1980) ("Geography has long been peculiarly susceptible to judicial notice for the obvious reason that geographic locations are facts which are not generally controversial . . . ."). --------
RECOMMENDATION
Based on the foregoing reasons, the undersigned recommends Plaintiff's Amended and Unopposed Motion to Transfer Venue Under 28 U.S.C. §§ 1404, 1406 (Doc. No. 12) should be GRANTED and this action be transferred to the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Oklahoma. Additionally, Plaintiff's initial Motion to Transfer Venue Under 28 U.S.C. §§ 1404, 1406 (Doc. No. 11) should be DENIED as moot.
The parties are advised of their right to file an objection to this Report and Recommendation with the Clerk of this Court by June 16th , 2020, in accordance with 28 U.S.C. § 636 and Fed. R. Civ. P. 72. The failure to timely object to this Report and Recommendation would waive appellate review of the recommended ruling. Moore v. United States of America, 950 F.2d 656 (10th Cir. 1991); see, c.f., Marshall v. Chater, 75 F.3d 1421, 1426 (10th Cir. 1996) ("Issues raised for the first time in objections to the magistrate judge's recommendation are deemed waived.").
This Report and Recommendation disposes of all issues referred to the undersigned Magistrate Judge in the captioned matter.
Dated this 27th day of May, 2020.
/s/_________
GARY M. PURCELL
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE