David Murillo, a veteran with a 100% disability rating from the Department of Veterans Affairs, applied for Social Security Disability Insurance benefits in October 2022 after working as a prison security officer for over 15 years. The Commissioner initially denied his claim, and the denial was upheld upon reconsideration. Murillo then appeared pro se before an Administrative Law Judge, who also found him not disabled. After the Appeals Council denied his request for review, Murillo filed a complaint in the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas. The district court adopted a magistrate judge's recommendation to affirm the ALJ's ruling, and Murillo appealed to the Fifth Circuit.
The Fifth Circuit reviewed the case under 42 U.S.C. § 405(g) and 28 U.S.C. § 1291, applying the standard that a final decision is upheld if supported by substantial evidence and if the Commissioner used proper legal standards. The court noted that while pro se briefs are afforded liberal construction, litigants must still brief their arguments to preserve them. The court found that Murillo's brief consisted of 'bare assertions bereft of evidentiary support.' Consequently, the court held that Murillo had abandoned his claims on appeal. The court did not reach the merits of the substantial evidence argument because the procedural failure to preserve the issue was dispositive.
The decision affirms the denial of Murillo's benefits, leaving him without Social Security Disability Insurance. It serves as a reminder to pro se litigants that failure to properly brief arguments results in abandonment of claims, regardless of the underlying merits. No remand instructions were issued as the court affirmed the district court's judgment in full.
Podcast (federal-narrative-summaries): Play in new window | Download