Seay v. Social Security, Commissioner of

Filing 17

ORDER Adopting 16 Report and Recommendation and Granting 15 Defendant's Motion for Summary Judgment. Signed by District Judge Stephen J. Murphy, III. (CCoh)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN
SOUTHERN DIVISION

MICHAEL SEAY,
Case No. 11-cv-10589
Plaintiff,
HONORABLE STEPHEN J. MURPHY, III
v.
COMMISSIONER OF SOCIAL
SECURITY,
Defendant.
/

ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION (docket no. 16), AND
GRANTING DEFENDANT'S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT (docket no. 15)
This matter is before the Court on review of the Commissioner of Social Security's
decision denying Plaintiff Michael Seay's application for Supplemental Security Income
(SSI) under the Social Security Act. The Court referred the matter to a magistrate judge for
issuance of a Report and Recommendation. The magistrate judge recommends dismissing
Plaintiff's complaint because Plaintiff has failed to prosecute his case. See Report &
Recommendation, ECF No. 16. Specifically, he failed to respond to an order to show
cause, failed to file a motion for summary judgment, and failed to file a response to
Defendant's motion for summary judgment. Id. Alternatively, the magistrate recommends
granting Defendant's motion for summary judgment and affirming the findings of the
Commissioner.
A copy of the Report and Recommendation was served upon the parties on February
21, 2012. Pursuant to Civil Rule 72(b)(2), each party had fourteen days from that date in
which to file any specific written objections to the recommended disposition. Neither party
has filed any objections, therefore de novo review of the magistrate judge's finding is not

required. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b)(3) (requiring de novo review by a district judge only for
"any part of the magistrate judge's disposition that has been properly objected to").
Having reviewed the file and the Report and Recommendation, the Court finds that
the magistrate judge's analysis is proper. Accordingly, the Court adopts the Report's
findings and conclusions, and will enter an appropriate judgment.
WHEREFORE it is hereby ORDERED that the Report and Recommendation of
February 21, 2012, (docket no. 16) is ADOPTED.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Defendant's Motion for Summary Judgment (docket
no. 15) is GRANTED.
SO ORDERED.
s/Stephen J. Murphy, III
STEPHEN J. MURPHY, III
United States District Judge
Dated: March 26, 2012
I hereby certify that a copy of the foregoing document was served upon the parties and/or
counsel of record on March 26, 2012, by electronic and/or ordinary mail.
Carol Cohron
Case Manager

2