Gary R. Singerman v. Kenneth S. Apfel, Commissioner of Social Security

[NOT FOR PUBLICATION–NOT TO BE CITED AS PRECEDENT]
United States Court of Appeals
For the First Circuit
No. 00-1177
GARY R. SINGERMAN,
Plaintiff, Appellant,
v.
KENNETH S. APFEL, COMMISSIONER OF SOCIAL SECURITY,
Defendant, Appellee.
APPEAL FROM THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF MASSACHUSETTS
[Hon. Joyce L. Alexander, U.S. Magistrate Judge]
Before
Selya, Circuit Judge,
Campbell, Senior Circuit Judge,
and Boudin, Circuit Judge.
Lindsay P. Rand, Nashawaty, Hayden & Rand and Dana A. Curhan
on brief for appellant.
Donald K. Stern, United States Attorney, and Christopher M.
Tauro, Assistant U.S. Attorney, on brief for appellee.
October 5, 2000

-- 1 of 2 --

-2-
Per Curiam. The district court judgment dismissing
the complaint for lack of subject-matter jurisdiction is
summarily affirmed. Plaintiff advances a pair of arguments
on appeal--alleging that he never received notice of the
1991 denial of his application for social security benefits,
and that the Commissioner undertook a constructive reopening
of that application in the course of addressing plaintiff's
second application for benefits. Neither of these
contentions, however, was properly presented to the district
court. Even in the non-adversarial social security context,
it is "settled that matters not brought to the attention of
the district court are deemed waived on appeal."
Evangelista v. Secretary of Health and Human Serv., 826 F.2d
136, 144 (1st Cir. 1987). We add that both arguments, in any
event, prove to be without substantive merit on the record
before us.
Affirmed. See Loc. R. 27(c).

-- 2 of 2 --