Idalski v Social Security, Commissioner of

Filing 22

ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION (Doc. 21) AND GRANTING IN PART PLAINTIFFS MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT (Doc. 12) AND DENYING DEFENDANTS MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT (Doc. 15) AND REMANDING MATTER FOR FURTHER ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEEDINGS (MVer)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN
SOUTHERN DIVISION
CHRISTOPHER IDALSKI,
Plaintiff,
Case No. 16-11560
v.
HONORABLE AVERN COHN
COMMISSIONER OF SOCIAL SECURITY,
Defendant.
____________________________________/
ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION (Doc. 21)
AND
GRANTING IN PART PLAINTIFF’S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT (Doc. 12)
AND
DENYING DEFENDANT’S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT (Doc. 15)
AND
REMANDING MATTER FOR FURTHER ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEEDINGS
I.
This is a social security case. Plaintiff Christopher Idalski appeals from the final
determination of the Commissioner of Social Security (Commissioner) that he is not
disabled and therefore not entitled to disability insurance benefits. The matter was
referred to a magistrate judge for all pretrial proceedings. Plaintiff and the Commissioner
filed cross motions for summary judgment. (Docs. 12, 15). Plaintiff requested that the
Commissioner’s decision either be reversed or remanded to the Administrative Law
Judge (ALJ) for further proceedings.
The magistrate judge issued a report and recommendation (MJRR),
recommending that plaintiff’s motion be granted in part, the Commissioner’s motion be
denied, and the matter remanded under sentence four1 for further administrative

1

“A district court's authority to remand a case for further administrative
proceedings is found in 42 U.S.C. § 405(g).” Hollon v. Commissioner, 447 F.3d 477,

proceedings. (Doc. 21). Specifically, the magistrate judge recommends a remand to the
ALJ for a proper analysis under Listing 2.07.
II.
Neither party has filed objections to the MJRR and the time for filing objections
has passed. The failure to file objections to the report and recommendation waives any
further right to appeal. Smith v. Detroit Federation of Teachers Local 231, 829 F.2d
1370, 1373 (6th Cir.1987). Likewise, the failure to object to the magistrate judge's report
releases the Court from its duty to independently review the motions. Thomas v. Arn,
474 U.S. 140, 149 (1985).
However, the Court has reviewed the MJRR and agrees with the magistrate
judge. Accordingly, the findings and conclusions of the magistrate judge are ADOPTED
as the findings and conclusions of the Court. Plaintiff’s motion for summary judgment is
GRANTED IN PART. The Commissioner’s motion for summary judgment is DENIED.
This matter is REMANDED for further administrative proceedings consistent with
the MJRR.
SO ORDERED.
S/Avern Cohn
AVERN COHN
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Dated: September 19, 2017
Detroit, Michigan

482-83 (6th Cir. 2006). The statute permits only two types of remand: a sentence four
(post-judgment) remand made in connection with a judgment affirming, modifying, or
reversing the Commissioner's decision; and a sentence six (pre-judgment) remand
where the court makes no substantive ruling as to the correctness of the Commissioner's
decision. Hollon, 447 F.3d at 486 (citing Melkonyan v. Sullivan, 501 U.S. 89, 99-100,
111 S.Ct. 2157, 115 L.Ed.2d 78 (1991)).

2