Medina v. Social Security, Commissioner of

Filing 15

ORDER Adopting Report and Recommendation and REMANDING this Matter to the Commissioner for Further Proceedings re 11 Motion for Summary Judgment filed by Social Security, Commissioner of, 9 Motion for Summary Judgment filed by Courtney Lynne Medina, 14 Report and Recommendation Signed by District Judge Sean F. Cox. (JMcC)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN
SOUTHERN DIVISION

Courtney Lynne Medina,
Plaintiff,
v.

Case No. 11-15272
Hon. Sean F. Cox

Commissioner of
Social Security,
Defendant.
_______________________________________________/

ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION
Plaintiff brought this action seeking judicial review of the Commissioner’s unfavorable
decision denying benefits. Thereafter, the matter was referred to Magistrate Judge Mark 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).
Thereafter, the parties filed cross-motions for summary judgment. In a Report and
Recommendation (“R&R”) issued on September 13, 2012, Magistrate Judge Randon
recommended that this Court: 1) Deny Defendant’s Motion for Summary Judgment; and 2)
Remand this matter to the Commissioner for further proceedings. The R&R recommends that
the Court order that, on remand, the ALJ must: 1) apply the four factors outlined in 20 CFR §
404.1527; 2) indicate with sufficient specificity the weight he gave Dr. Raval’s opinion; and 3)
indicate with sufficient specificity the reasons for that weight. (R&R at 26).
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 September 13, 2012 R&R. IT IS ORDERED that
Defendant’s Motion for Summary Judgment is DENIED.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that this matter is REMANDED to the Commissioner for
further proceedings, as specified on page 26 of the R&R.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
S/Sean F. Cox
Sean F. Cox
United States District Judge
Dated: October 31, 2012
I hereby certify that a copy of the foregoing document was served upon counsel of record on
October 31, 2012, by electronic and/or ordinary mail.
S/Jennifer McCoy
Case Manager