Minke v. Social Security, Commissioner of
Filing
18
ORDER Adopting 17 Report and Recommendation: Denying 15 Motion for Summary Judgment filed by Social Security, Commissioner of, and Granting in part and Denying in part 13 Motion for Summary Judgment filed by Tehea L Minke. Signed by District Judge Stephen J. Murphy, III. (CCoh)
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN
SOUTHERN DIVISION
TEHEA L. MINKE,
Plaintiff,
Case No. 2:15-cv-12516
v.
HONORABLE STEPHEN J. MURPHY, III
COMMISSIONER OF SOCIAL
SECURITY,
Defendant.
/
ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION
(document no. 17), DENYING DEFENDANT'S MOTION
FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT (document no. 15), GRANTING
IN PART AND DENYING IN PART PLAINTIFF'S MOTION FOR
SUMMARY JUDGMENT (document no. 13), AND REMANDING THE CASE
Plaintiff Tehea Minke ("Minke") filed an application for Supplemental Security Income
("SSI") in January of 2012. When that application was denied, she sought and received an
administrative hearing the following March. The ALJ, in a written opinion, found she was
not disabled. After the Appeals Court denied review, Minke filed for judicial review by the
Court. The case was referred to a magistrate judge and the parties filed cross motions for
summary judgment. See ECF Nos. 13, 15. The magistrate judge issued a Report and
Recommendation ("Report") suggesting that the Court deny the Commissioner's motion,
grant in part and deny in part Minke's motion and remand the case to the ALJ on the
ground that the ALJ's conclusion that Minke is not disabled was not supported by
substantial evidence. See Report 1, ECF No. 17. Neither party filed objections.
Civil Rule 72(b) governs review of a magistrate judge's report and recommendation.
De novo review of the magistrate judge's findings is only required if the parties "serve and
file specific written objections to the proposed findings and recommendations." Fed. R. Civ.
P. 72(b)(2).
Because neither Minke nor the Commissioner filed objections, de novo review of the
Report's conclusions is not required. Having reviewed the Report's analysis, in light of the
record, the Court finds that its conclusions are factually based and legally sound.
Accordingly, it will adopt the Report's findings, deny the Commissioner's motion for
summary judgment, grant in part Minke's motion for summary judgment to the extent it
seeks remand, deny the motion in part to the extent it seeks an award of damages and
remand the case for further proceedings consistent with the Report.
ORDER
WHEREFORE, it is hereby ORDERED that the magistrate judge's Report and
Recommendation (document no. 17) is ADOPTED.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Commissioner's Motion for Summary Judgment
(document no. 15) is DENIED.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Minke's Motion for Summary Judgment (document
no. 13) is GRANTED IN PART and DENIED IN PART.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the case is REMANDED for further proceedings
consistent with the Report.
SO ORDERED.
s/Stephen J. Murphy, III
STEPHEN J. MURPHY, III
United States District Judge
Dated: August 10, 2016
2
I hereby certify that a copy of the foregoing document was served upon the parties and/or
counsel of record on August 10, 2016, by electronic and/or ordinary mail.
s/Carol Cohron
Case Manager
3
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?