Rider v. Social Security

Filing 28

ORDER Adopting 27 Report and Recommendation re 25 Motion for Attorney Fees, Signed by District Judge Laurie J. Michelson. (WBar)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN
SOUTHERN DIVISION
CANDY S. RIDER,
Plaintiff,
v.

Case No. 16-13354
Honorable Laurie J. Michelson
Magistrate Judge David R. Grand

COMMISSIONER OF SOCIAL
SECURITY,
Defendant.
ORDER ACCEPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION [27] GRANTING
PLAINTIFF’S MOTION FOR ATTORNEY’S FEES [25]
Before the Court is Magistrate Judge David R. Grand’s May 9, 2019, Report and
Recommendation. (ECF No. 27.) At the conclusion, Magistrate Judge Grand notified the parties
that they were required to file any objections within fourteen days of service, as provided in Federal
Rule of Civil Procedure 72(b)(2) and Eastern District of Michigan Local Rule 72.1(d), and that
“[f]ailure to file specific objections constitutes a waiver of any further right of appeal.” (ECF No.
27, PageID.638.) It is now May 24, 2019. As such, the time to file objections has expired. No
objections have been filed.
The Court finds that the parties’ failure to object is a procedural default, waiving review of
the Magistrate Judge’s findings by this Court. In United States v. Walters, 638 F.2d 947, 949–50
(6th Cir. 1981), the Sixth Circuit established a rule of procedural default, holding that “a party
shall file objections with the district court or else waive right to appeal.” And in Thomas v. Arn,
474 U.S. 140, 144 (1985), the Supreme Court explained that the Sixth Circuit’s waiver-ofappellate-review rule rested on the assumption “that the failure to object may constitute a
procedural default waiving review even at the district court level.” 474 U.S. at 149; see also

Garrison v. Equifax Info. Servs., LLC, No. 10-13990, 2012 WL 1278044, at *8 (E.D. Mich. Apr.
16, 2012) (“The Court is not obligated to review the portions of the report to which no objection
was made.” (citing Thomas, 474 U.S. at 149–52)). The Court further held that this rule violates
neither the Federal Magistrates Act nor the Federal Constitution.
The Court therefore finds that the parties have waived further review of the Magistrate
Judge’s Report and accepts his recommended disposition. It follows that Plaintiff’s motion for
attorney’s fees (ECF No. 25) is GRANTED and that attorney’s fees be awarded to Plaintiff’s
attorney, Matthew Taylor, in the amount of $5,000.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
s/Laurie J. Michelson
LAURIE J. MICHELSON
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
Date: May 24, 2019
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
I hereby certify that a copy of the foregoing document was served upon counsel of record
and/or pro se parties on this date, May 24, 2019, using the Electronic Court Filing system and/or
first-class U.S. mail.
s/William Barkholz
Case Manager

2