Springer v. Colvin

Filing 24

ORDER (1) Granting Plaintiff's 16 Motion for Summary Judgment, (2) Denying Defendant's 19 Motion for Summary Judgment, and (3) Remanding Plaintiff's Claim for Benefits for Further Proceedings. Signed by District Judge Matthew F. Leitman. (HMon)

Download PDF
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN SOUTHERN DIVISION DARYL B. SPRINGER, Plaintiff, Case No. 16-cv-10681 Hon. Matthew F. Leitman v. COMMISSIONER OF SOCIAL SECURITY, Defendant. _________________________________/ ORDER (1) GRANTING PLAINTIFF’S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT (ECF #16), (2) DENYING DEFENDANT’S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT (ECF #19), AND (3) REMANDING PLAINTIFF’S CLAIM FOR BENEFITS FOR FURTHER PROCEEDINGS In this action, Plaintiff Daryl B. Springer (“Plaintiff”) challenges the denial of his application for disability insurance benefits. (See Compl., ECF #1.) Plaintiff and the Commissioner of Social Security (“Defendant”) have now filed cross-motions for summary judgment. (See ECF ## 16, 19.) On June 22, 2017, the assigned Magistrate Judge issued a Report and Recommendation recommending that the Court grant Plaintiff’s motion, deny Defendant’s motion, and this matter be remanded to the Social Security Administration for further proceedings (the “R&R”). (See ECF #23.) At the conclusion of the R&R, the Magistrate Judge informed the parties that if they wanted 1 to seek review of his recommendation, they needed to file specific objections with the Court within fourteen days. (See id. at Pg. ID 625-26.) Defendant has not filed any objections to the R&R. The failure to file objections to an R&R waives any further right to appeal. See Howard v. Sec'y of Health and Human Servs., 932 F.2d 505 (6th Cir. 1991); Smith v. Detroit Fed'n of Teachers Local 231, 829 F.2d 1370, 1373 (6th Cir. 1987). Likewise, the failure to object to an R&R releases the Court from its duty to independently review the matter. See Thomas v. Arn, 474 U.S. 140, 149 (1985). Accordingly, because Defendant has failed to file any objections to the R&R, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the Magistrate Judge’s recommendation to grant Plaintiff’s Motion for Summary Judgment is ADOPTED. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that (1) Plaintiff's Motion for Summary Judgment (ECF #16) is GRANTED; (2) Defendant’s Motion for Summary Judgment (ECF #19) is DENIED; and (3) Plaintiff’s claim for benefits is REMANDED to the Social Security Administration for further proceedings consistent with the R&R (ECF #23) and this order.             s/Matthew F. Leitman MATTHEW F. LEITMAN UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE Dated: July 10, 2017 2 I hereby certify that a copy of the foregoing document was served upon the parties and/or counsel of record on July 10, 2017, by electronic means and/or ordinary mail. s/Holly A. Monda Case Manager (810) 341-9764 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?