Richards v. Social Security, Commissioner of

Filing 23

ORDER Adopting Magistrate Judge's 22 Report and Recommendation. Signed by District Judge Robert H. Cleland. (SBur)

Download PDF
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN SOUTHERN DIVISION JOANN RICHARDS, Plaintiff, CASE NO: 16-CV-10905-DT v. COMMISIONER OF SOCIAL SECURITY, Defendant. / ORDER ADOPTING MAGISTRATE JUDGE’S REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION This matter was referred to United States Magistrate Judge Mona K. Majzoub pursuant to U.S.C. §636(b)(1)(B) and Local Rule 72.1. In her report filed on February 16, 2017, the magistrate judge recommended that this court deny Plaintiff Commissioner of Social Security’s Motion for Summary Judgment and grant Defendant Michael Thomas McClure’s Motion for Summary Judgment. No objections have been filed pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C), thus further appeal rights are waived.1 Having reviewed the file and the report, the court concludes that the findings and conclusions of the magistrate judge are correct and ADOPTS the same for purposes of this Order. Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED that, for the reasons set forth in the Magistrate Judge’s Report and Recommendation, Plaintiff’s Motion for Summary Judgment {Dkt #16} is DENIED, and Defendant’s Motion for Summary Judgment {Dkt #19] is GRANTED and the above action is DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE. 1 The failure to object to the magistrate judge’s report releases the court from its duty to independently review the motion. Thomas v. Arn, 474 U.S. 140, 149 (1985). SO ORDERED. Dated: March 6, 2017 s/Robert H. Cleland ROBERT H. CLELAND UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE I hereby certify that a copy of the foregoing document was mailed to counsel of record and/or pro se parties on this date, March 6, 2017, by electronic and/or ordinary mail. s/Shawna C. Burns Case Manager Generalist (810) 292-6522

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?