King v. Colvin

Filing 20

ORDER Adopting 19 Report and Recommendation Denying 15 Motion for Summary Judgment filed by Ernestine A King,Granting 17 Motion for Summary Judgment filed by CAROLYN W COLVIN, and Dismissing Case. Signed by District Judge Stephen J. Murphy, III. (CCoh)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN
SOUTHERN DIVISION
ERNESTINE A. KING,
Plaintiff,

Case No. 14-cv-11157

v.

HONORABLE STEPHEN J. MURPHY, III

CAROLYN W. COLVIN,
Defendant.
/
ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND
RECOMMENDATION (document no. 19), GRANTING COLVIN'S
MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT (document no. 17), DENYING KING’S
MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT (document no. 15), AND DISMISSING CASE
The Social Security Administration denied plaintiff and claimant Ernestine King's
application for a period of disability and disability insurance benefits in a decision issued
by an Administrative Law Judge on October 22, 2010. See Tr. 16, ALJ Decision, ECF No.
12-3. An appeal and remand followed, and a second Administrative Law Judge again found
King not disabled. See Tr. 12, ALJ Decision, ECF No. 12-2. After the SSA Appeals Council
declined to review the decision, King appealed to this Court. The Court referred the matter
to a United States Magistrate Judge, and the parties filed cross motions for summary
judgment. On February 24, 2015, the magistrate judge issued a Report and
Recommendation suggesting the Court grant Colvin’s motion and deny King's motion.
Report, ECF No. 19.
Under Civil Rule 72(b), each party had fourteen days from the date of service to file
any written objections to the recommended disposition. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b). Neither
party has filed objections. De novo review of the magistrate judge’s findings is therefore not
required. Id. The Court has reviewed the file and the Report, and finds the magistrate

judge’s analysis is proper. Accordingly, the Court adopts the Report’s findings and
conclusions, and will enter an appropriate judgment.
ORDER
WHEREFORE, it is hereby ORDERED that the Report and Recommendation
(document no. 19) is ADOPTED.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Commissioner's Motion for Summary Judgment
(document no. 17) is GRANTED.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that King’s Motion for Summary Judgment (document
no. 15) is DENIED, and the case is DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE.
SO ORDERED.

s/Stephen J. Murphy, III
STEPHEN J. MURPHY, III
United States District Judge
Dated: March 12, 2015
I hereby certify that a copy of the foregoing document was served upon the parties and/or
counsel of record on March 12, 2015, by electronic and/or ordinary mail.
s/Carol Cohron
Case Manager

2