Alan Roland v. Social Security Administration

Roland · United States District Court for the Eastern District of Washington · November 21, 2025 · No. 2:25-CV-00235-RHW

Summary

The United States District Court for the Eastern District of Washington granted the Social Security Administration’s motion to dismiss Alan Roland’s pro se complaint. The court dismissed the claims with prejudice for lack of subject matter jurisdiction because Medicare coverage had been reinstated, administrative remedies had not been exhausted, and the request for records did not comply with applicable Privacy Act procedures.

Court
United States District Court for the Eastern District of Washington
Writing for the Court
Robert H. Whaley
Jurisdiction
U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Washington
Decision date
November 21, 2025
Docket number
2:25-CV-00235-RHW
Procedural posture
Plaintiff filed a pro se action seeking reinstatement of Medicare coverage, reimbursement of Medicare contributions, and production of records. Defendant moved to dismiss under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6), also challenging subject matter jurisdiction under Rule 12(b)(1). The court granted dismissal under Rule 12(b)(1), dismissed the action with prejudice, denied leave to amend, and closed the case.
Standard of review
On a Rule 12(b)(1) factual jurisdictional attack, the court may consider evidence outside the pleadings. A Rule 12(b)(6) complaint must contain enough factual matter to state a facially plausible claim, with well-pleaded allegations accepted as true and reasonable inferences drawn for the plaintiff.
Precedential value
unpublished district court order
Parties
Alan Roland v. Social Security Administration
Disposition
dismissed

Topics

motions to dismisssubject matter jurisdictionexhaustion of remediesmedicare medicaidadministrative law

Practice areas

civil procedureadministrative lawSocial Security and Medicare lawPrivacy Act

Questions Presented

  1. Whether the court had subject matter jurisdiction over Roland's claims for Medicare coverage and reimbursement when the agency had reinstated coverage and Roland had not exhausted the required administrative remedies.
  2. Whether Roland's request for Medicare records could proceed when he had not exhausted administrative remedies and had made an impermissible blanket request under the Social Security Administration's regulations.
  3. Whether the complaint should be dismissed with prejudice without leave to amend.

Holdings

  1. The court lacked subject matter jurisdiction over Roland's claims for Medicare coverage and reimbursement because the coverage claim was moot after the agency reinstated coverage, Roland had an adequate administrative remedy concerning the effective date of coverage, and he had not exhausted the administrative review process required for Medicare determinations.
  2. Roland could not proceed on his records claim because he was required to exhaust administrative remedies and comply with the Social Security Administration's records-request regulations, which do not honor blanket requests for all records or information.
  3. Dismissal with prejudice without leave to amend was proper because the jurisdictional deficiencies could not be cured by amendment.

Key quotations

Federal courts are not courts of general jurisdiction; they have only the power that is authorized by Article III of the Constitution and the statutes enacted by Congress pursuant thereto. (at 2)
To issue a writ of mandamus, a party must first exhaust all other avenues of relief. (at 6)
The regulations provide further that the agency “do[es] not honor requests for all records, all information, or similar blanket requests.” (at 8)

Factual background

Roland alleged that his Medicare coverage should have been reinstated effective January 16, 2024, and sought reimbursement of approximately $7,200 in payments made since June 2022. After he filed suit, the Social Security Administration notified him that he was entitled to Medicare coverage beginning in August 2025 and advised him that he could request benefits beginning in January 2024. Roland also sought all of his records from the prior ten years, although he had not completed the applicable administrative review and records-request procedures.

Procedural history

Roland filed the complaint on July 1, 2025. After the action was filed, the Social Security Administration issued notice that his Medicare coverage had been reinstated effective August 2025, and Roland acknowledged receiving that information. The court determined that the Medicare-related claims were moot or barred by failure to exhaust administrative remedies and that the records claim also required exhaustion and compliance with agency procedures.

Court Document

Open PDF
Loading document…