Streissguth

Streissguth v. Saul

Good Law
United States District Court, Northern District of CaliforniaOctober 20, 20203:19-cv-04252California2,357 words

Opinion

Trial Court Opinion

BACKGROUND

25 Plaintiff began receiving supplemental security income (SSI) in September 1989. 26 27 (Administrative Record (AR) 6.) In 2009, Plaintiffs application to participate in the Social Security Administration’s PASS program was approved. (AR 6.) Under the PASS program, an SSI recipient develops and pursues a vocational plan aimed at eliminating or significantly || reducing the claimant’s reliance on disability benefits. See 20 C.F.R. 8§ 416.1180—-146.1181. The SSI recipient must set forth a viable and financially sustainable PASS plan with a feasible goal. See 20 C.F.R. § 416.1181. At the time Plaintiff's PASS was approved he was 65—a year away from full retirement || age, see 20 C.F.R. § 404.409. A year later, when he achieved full retirement age, on July 18, 2010, his SSI disability benefits converted to SSI aged payments and his SSDI benefits converted to retirement benefits. (AR 8.) Seven years later, in July 2017, Plaintiff received a notice suspending his PASS which stated: a We reviewed your Plan for Achieving Self-Support (PASS). Your plan is suspended effective July 2017 for…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.