Annabel Mantz v. Social Security Administration , 486 F. App'x 845 ( 2012 )

Case: 12-10198 Date Filed: 08/15/2012 Page: 1 of 2
[DO NOT PUBLISH]
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT
________________________
No. 12-10198
Non-Argument Calendar
________________________
D.C. Docket No. 9:11-cv-80031-KAM
ANNABEL MANTZ,
llllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllll Plaintiff - Appellant,
versus
SOCIAL SECURITY ADMINISTRATION,
llllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllll Defendant - Appellee.
________________________
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Southern District of Florida
________________________
(August 15, 2012)
Before HULL, WILSON and MARTIN, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:
Annabel Mantz appeals the district court’s dismissal of her pro se complaint
Case: 12-10198 Date Filed: 08/15/2012 Page: 2 of 2
seeking Social Security disability benefits. The district court found, and Mantz
herself concedes, that Mantz failed to exhaust her administrative remedies prior to
bringing suit in the district court. Mantz, who has previously been unsuccessful
seeking disability benefits, stated that she was circumventing the administrative
appeals process because she “felt she would get justice this way and not get any
justice going through the Disability appeal process . . . .” The district court found
that it lacked subject matter jurisdiction because Mantz had failed to exhaust her
administrative remedies.
We review de novo the district court’s determination that it lacked subject
matter jurisdiction. See Cash v. Barnhart, 327 F.3d 1252, 1255 n.4 (11th Cir.
2003) (per curiam). Federal courts may not review administrative decisions
except as provided for in 42 U.S.C. § 405(g), Bloodsworth v. Heckler, 703 F.2d
1233, 1236 (11th Cir. 1983), and to obtain review under § 405(g), a Social
Security claimant must have presented a claim for benefits to the Commissioner
and exhausted her administrative remedies, Crayton v. Callahan, 120 F.3d 1217,
1220 (11th Cir. 1997). Because Mantz failed to exhaust her remedies and she does
not raise a constitutional claim, the district court properly concluded that it lacked
jurisdiction to hear her appeal.
AFFIRMED.
2