Harmon v. Colvin

Filing 16

ORDER (See Written Order). The Report and Recommendation (d/e 15 ) is ADOPTEDin its entirety. Defendant's Motion for Summary Affirmance (d/e 13 )is GRANTED, and Plaintiff's Motion for Summary Judgment or Remand (d/e 10 ) is DENIED. The Decision of the Commissioner is AFFIRMED. THIS CASE IS CLOSED. Entered by Judge Sue E. Myerscough on 3/23/2016. (VM, ilcd)

E-FILED

Wednesday, 23 March, 2016 04:23:21 PM
Clerk, U.S. District Court, ILCD

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
CENTRAL DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS
SPRINGFIELD DIVISION
DOUGLAS D. HARMON,

)
)
Plaintiff,
)
)
v.
)
)
CAROLYN COLVIN, Acting
)
Commissioner of Social Security, )
)
Defendant.
)

No. 14-cv-3258

ORDER
SUE E. MYERSCOUGH, U.S. District Judge:
This matter comes before the Court on the Report and
Recommendation of United States Magistrate Judge Tom
Schanzle-Haskins (d/e 15). Judge Schanzle-Haskins recommends
that this Court allow Defendant Commissioner of Social Security’s
Motion for Summary Affirmance (d/e 13), deny Plaintiff Douglas
Harmon’s Motion for Summary Judgment or Remand (d/e 10), and
affirm the decision of the Commissioner of Social Security denying
Plaintiff’s application for Supplemental Social Security Income
Disability Benefits.

Page 1 of 3

Objections to the Report and Recommendation were due on or
before March 11, 2016. Neither party filed objections.
Pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 72(b)(3), the Court
Amay accept, reject, or modify the recommended disposition; receive
further evidence; or return the matter to the magistrate judge with
instructions.@ Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b)(3). The Court reviews de novo
any part of the Report and Recommendation to which a proper
objection has been made. Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b)(3). AIf no objection
or only partial objection is made, the district court judge reviews
those unobjected portions for clear error.@ Johnson v. Zema Sys.
Corp., 170 F. 3d 734, 739 (7th Cir. 1999) (also noting that a party
who fails to object to the report and recommendation waives
appellate review of the factual and legal questions).
Judge Schanzle-Haskins found that the ALJ’s decision was
supported by substantial evidence. After reviewing the record, the
Report and Recommendation, the briefing, and the applicable law,
this Court finds no clear error.

Page 2 of 3

IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED THAT:
(1)

The Report and Recommendation (d/e 15) is ADOPTED

in its entirety.
(2)

Defendant’s Motion for Summary Affirmance (d/e 13)

is GRANTED, and Plaintiff’s Motion for Summary Judgment or
Remand (d/e 10) is DENIED.
is AFFIRMED.

The Decision of the Commissioner

THIS CASE IS CLOSED.

ENTER: March 23, 2016
FOR THE COURT:
s/ Sue E. Myerscough
SUE E. MYERSCOUGH
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Page 3 of 3