Hester v. Social Security, Commissioner of

Filing 17

ORDER Adopting in Part Report and Recommendation Granting 11 Motion to Dismiss filed by Social Security, Commissioner of, re 16 Report and Recommendation Signed by District Judge Sean F. Cox. (JHer)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN
SOUTHERN DIVISION

Annie M. Hester,
Plaintiff,
v.

Case No. 11-11781
Honorable Sean F. Cox

Commissioner of Social Security,
Defendant.
______________________________/
ORDER
ADOPTING, IN PART, REPORT & RECOMMENDATION
Plaintiff brought this action seeking judicial review of the Commissioner’s decision
denying her applications for benefits. Thereafter, the matter was referred to Magistrate Judge
Mona Majzoub for determination of all non-dispositive motions pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §
636(b)(1) and Report and Recommendation pursuant to § 636(b)(1)(B) and (C).
Thereafter, the Commissioner filed a Motion to Dismiss. In a Report and
Recommendation (“R&R”) issued on June 13, 2012, Magistrate Judge Majzoub recommended
that this Court grant the Commissioner’s Motion to Dismiss and dismiss this action. (Docket
Entry No. 16). Her R&R further recommends that this Court: 1) order that Plaintiff must include
a reference to Judge Ludington’s September 2, 2009 pre-filing order on the first page of any
future complaint she files against the Commissioner; 2) order that the Clerk of the Court be
directed not to file any complaint against the Commissioner that has not been approved in
accordance with the September 2, 2009 order; and 3) order that the Clerk of the Court shall

1

dismiss any complaints that Plaintiff files in violation of the September 2, 2009 Order.
Pursuant to FED. R. CIV. P. 72(b), a party objecting to the recommended disposition of a
matter by a Magistrate Judge must filed objections to the R&R within fourteen (14) days after
being served with a copy of the R&R. “The district judge to whom the case is assigned shall
make a de novo determination upon the record, or after additional evidence, of any portion of the
magistrate judge’s disposition to which specific written objection has been made.” Id.
The time for filing objections to the R&R has expired and the docket reflects that neither
party has filed objections to the R&R.
The Court hereby ADOPTS the portion of the June 13, 2012 R&R that recommends that
the Commissioner’s Motion to Dismiss be granted and this action dismissed. The Court further
ADOPTS the recommendation that this Court order Plaintiff to include a reference to Judge
Ludington’s September 2, 2009 pre-filing order on the first page of any future complaint she
files against the Commissioner.
After consultation with the Clerk’s Office, however, the Court REJECTS the
recommendations that this Court order that the Clerk of the Court be directed not to file any
complaint against the Commissioner that has not been approved in accordance with the
September 2, 2009 order and that it order that the Clerk of the Court to dismiss any complaints
that Plaintiff files in violation of the September 2, 2009 Order.
Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED that the Commissioner’s Motion to Dismiss is
GRANTED and this action shall be DISMISSED.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Plaintiff is ORDERED to include a reference to Judge
Ludington’s September 2, 2009 pre-filing order on the first page of any future complaint she

2

files against the Commissioner.
IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: July 17, 2012

S/ Sean F. Cox
Sean F. Cox
U. S. District Court Judge

I hereby certify that on July 17, 2012, the foregoing document was served upon counsel of
record by electronic means and upon Annie M. Hester by First Class Mail at the address below:
Annie M Hester
64 Menlo Park
Bellville, MI 48111
Dated: July 17, 2012

S/ Jennifer Hernandez
Case Manager

3