Getzen v. Social Security, Commissioner of

Filing 14

ORDER Adopting Report and Recommendation for Denying 11 Motion for Summary Judgment filed by Social Security, Commissioner of, Granting 9 Motion for Summary Judgment filed by Michael Lee Getzen re 13 Report and Recommendation. Signed by District Judge Sean F. Cox. (JMcC)

Download PDF
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN SOUTHERN DIVISION Michael Lee Getzen, Plaintiff, v. Case No. 11-14676 Honorable Sean F. Cox Commissioner of Social Security, Defendant. ______________________________/ ORDER ACCEPTING AND ADOPTING REPORT & RECOMMENDATION Plaintiff brought this action seeking judicial review of the Commissioner’s unfavorable decision disallowing social security disability benefits. (Docket No. 1.) Thereafter, the matter was referred to Magistrate Judge Mark A. Randon 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) . (Docket No. 3.) Thereafter, the parties filed cross-motions for summary judgment. (Docket Nos. 9, 11.) In a Report and Recommendation (“R&R”) issued on August 22, 2012, Magistrate Judge Randon concluded that substantial evidence does not support the Commissioner’s determination that Plaintiff is not disabled. (Docket No. 13, at 2.) Magistrate Judge Randon recommended that this Court: 1) GRANT Plaintiff’s Motion for Summary Judgment; and 2) DENY the Commissioner’s Motion for Summary Judgment, and that the findings and conclusions of the Commissioner be REMANDED for further proceedings. (Docket No. 13, at 21.) 1 Pursuant to FED. R. CIV. P. 72(b), a party objecting to the recommended disposition of a matter by a Magistrate Judge must file 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 August 22, 2012 R&R. IT IS ORDERED that Plaintiff’s Motion for Summary Judgment is GRANTED. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Commissioner’s Motion for Summary Judgment is DENIED and that the Commissioner’s findings and conclusions are REMANDED for further proceedings. IT IS SO ORDERED. S/Sean F. Cox Sean F. Cox United States District Judge Dated: October 2, 2012 I hereby certify that a copy of the foregoing document was served upon counsel of record on October 2, 2012, by electronic and/or ordinary mail. S/Jennifer McCoy Case Manager 2

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?