Apple v. Social Security, Commissioner of

Filing 18

ORDER Adopting Report and Recommendation for 15 Motion for Summary Judgment filed by Social Security, Commissioner of, 11 Motion for Summary Judgment filed by Madeline Apple Signed by District Judge Julian Abele Cook. (KDoa)

Download PDF
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN SOUTHERN DIVISION MADELINE APPLE, Plaintiff, v. Case No. 12-13354 Honorable Julian Abele Cook, Jr. COMMISSIONER OF SOCIAL SECURITY, Defendant. ORDER This case involves a complaint by the Plaintiff, Madeline Apple, who, in relying upon the authority of 42 U.S.C. § 405(g), has asked this Court to review a final decision by the Defendant, the Commissioner of the Social Security Administration (“Commissioner”). The parties thereafter filed motions for summary judgment pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 56, both of which were forwarded by the Court to Magistrate Judge Mark A. Randon for evaluation. In a report on July 19, 2013, the Magistrate Judge recommended that this Court (1) deny the Commissioner’s motion for summary judgment, (2) grant Apple’s motion for summary judgment, and (3) remand for further consideration pursuant to sentence four of 42 U.S.C. § 405(g). As of this date, neither party has expressed any objections to the Magistrate Judge’s report and recommendation. The period of time for filing objections having now expired, this Court adopts the report, including the recommendations of the Magistrate Judge, in its entirety. 1 IT IS SO ORDERED. Date: August 6, 2013 s/Julian Abele Cook, Jr. JULIAN ABELE COOK, JR. U.S. District Judge CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE The undersigned certifies that the foregoing Order was served upon counsel of record via the Court's ECF System to their respective email addresses or First Class U.S. mail to the non-ECF participants on August 6, 2013. s/ Kay Doaks 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?