Shaw v. Social Security, Commissioner of

Filing 33

ORDER Denying 26 Request for Hearing filed by Sharell A Shaw Signed by District Judge Avern Cohn. (JOwe)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN
SOUTHERN DIVISION

SHARELL A. SHAW,
Plaintiff,
Case No. 10-10727
v.
HONORABLE AVERN COHN
COMMISSIONER OF SOCIAL SECURITY,
Defendant.
____________________________________/
ORDER REGARDING PLAINTIFF’S REQUEST FOR HEARING (Doc. 26)
This is a social security case. On February 22, 2010, plaintiff Sharell Shaw,
proceeding pro se, filed this action seeking judicial review of an unfavorable decision
disallowing benefits. The matter was referred to a magistrate judge for all pretrial
proceedings. Defendant, the Commissioner of Social Security (Commissioner), filed a
motion to dismiss on the grounds that plaintiff had not timely appealed from a final
decision and therefore jurisdiction was lacking. On April 7, 2011, the magistrate judge
issued a report and recommendation (MJRR) recommending that the Commissioner’s
motion be granted. Doc. 8. Plaintiff did not timely file objections to the MJRR.
Accordingly, on May 6, 2011, the Court issued an order adopting the MJRR, granting
the Commissioner’s motion, and dismissing the case. Doc. 24.
Before the Court is plaintiff’s paper which has been docketed as a Request for
Hearing. Doc. 26. In this filing, plaintiff requests a hearing and also states that he did
not file objections to the MJRR because he did not receive it until May 11, 2011. His

paper is dated May 13, 2011. Doc. 26. That same day, plaintiff also filed a notice of
appeal, a request to proceed without payment of the fee on appeal, and a request for
the appointment of counsel on appeal. Docs. 27, 28, 29.
To the extent plaintiff’s filing is deemed a request for reconsideration, it is denied.
Although plaintiff says why he did not file objections, he does not ask for time in which
to file objections nor does he give any reasons as to why reconsideration is warranted.
See E.D. Mich. LR 7.1(h)(3). Indeed, the MJRR fully explains why plaintiff is not entitled
to the relief he seeks. Namely, that the Court lacks jurisdiction over this matter.
Moreover, given plaintiff’s filing of a notice of appeal, the better course is to have that
appeal proceed.
SO ORDERED.

S/Avern Cohn
AVERN COHN
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Dated: May 18, 2011

I hereby certify that a copy of the foregoing document was mailed to Sharell A.
Shaw, 20925 Lahser, Apt 815, Southfield, MI 48033 and the attorneys of record on this
date, May 18, 2011, by electronic and/or ordinary mail.

S/Julie Owens
Case Manager, [phone]

2