Gipson v. Commissioner of Social Security

Filing 16

ORDER entered by Judge Sue E. Myerscough on 12/4/17. The Report and Recommendation, d/e 15 is ADOPTED in its entirety. The Defendant's Motion for Summary Affirmance, d/e 13 is GRANTED and, the Plaintiff's Motion for Summary Judgment, d/e 10 is DENIED. The decision of the Commissioner is AFFIRMED. This case is CLOSED. (MAS, ilcd)

Download PDF
E-FILED Tuesday, 05 December, 2017 01:55:38 PM Clerk, U.S. District Court, ILCD IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT CENTRAL DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS SPRINGFIELD DIVISION FLOYD GIPSON, Plaintiff, v. COMMISSIONER OF SOCIAL SECURITY, Defendant. ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) No. 16-CV-3281 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 SchanzleHaskins (d/e 15). Judge Schanzle-Haskins recommends that this Court GRANT Defendant Commissioner of Social Security’s Motion for Summary Affirmance (d/e 13), DENY Plaintiff Floyd Gipson’s Motion for Summary Judgment (d/e 10), and affirm the decision of the Defendant Commissioner. Objections to the Report and Recommendation were due on or before November 30, 2017. Neither party filed objections. Page 1 of 3 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 the Administrative Law Judge’s decision was supported by substantial evidence. Judge Schanzle-Haskins addressed each of the issues raised by Plaintiff in his memorandum in support of his Motion for Summary Judgment (d/e 11). After reviewing the record, the Report and Recommendation, the parties’ Motions and memoranda, as well as 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 (d/e 10) is DENIED. (3) The decision of the Commissioner is AFFIRMED. (4) This case is CLOSED. ENTERED: December 4, 2017. FOR THE COURT: s/ Sue E. Myerscough SUE E. MYERSCOUGH Page 3 of 3

Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.

Why Is My Information Online?