McCLaine v. SSA, Commissioner of

Filing 19

ORDER Adopting 16 Report and Recommendation for Denying 14 Motion for Summary Judgment filed by Chante Chanell McCLaine, and 15 Motion for Summary Judgment filed by SSA, Commissioner of. Signed by District Judge Sean F. Cox. (JMcC)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN
SOUTHERN DIVISION
Chante Chanell McClaine,
Plaintiff,
v.

Case No. 16-13950

Commissioner of Social Security,

Sean F. Cox
United States District Court Judge

Defendant.
______________________________/
ORDER ADOPTING 1/29/18 REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION
Plaintiff Chante Chanell McClaine brought this action under 42 U.S.C. § 405(g) seeking
review of the Commissioner of Social Security’s denial of her application for disability
insurance benefits. The Court referred the matter to Magistrate Judge Anthony P. Patti for a
report and recommendation under 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) (Doc. # 2), after which the parties
filed cross-motions for summary judgment (Doc. # 14, 15).
On January 29, 2018, Magistrate Judge Patti issued a Report and Recommendation
(R&R) (Doc. # 17) wherein he recommends that the Court deny Plaintiff’s Motion for Summary
Judgment, Grant Defendant’s Motion for Summary Judgment, and affirm the Commissioner’s
decision. Plaintiff timely filed objections to the R&R (Doc. # 17). The Court reviews these
objections de novo. Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b).
To properly object to the R&R, Plaintiff must do more than simply restate the arguments
set forth in her summary judgment motion. Senneff v. Colvin, 2017 WL 710651 at * 2 (E.D.
Mich. Feb. 23, 2017). She has not done so. Not only do Plaintiff’s three objections rehash her
prior arguments, but they are almost exact, word-for-word copies of those arguments simply
1

rebranded as objections. These copy-pasted objections are akin to a general objection to the
R&R and fail to provide specific reasons why Magistrate Judge Patti erred in his analysis. Thus,
the Court shall overrule Plaintiff’s objections. See Wallace v. Comm’r of Soc. Sec., 2016 WL
4409062 at * 2 (E.D. Mich. 2016).
Accordingly, the Court OVERRULES Plaintiff’s objections and ADOPTS the Magistrate
Judge’s January 29, 2018 R&R. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that: 1) Defendant’s Motion for
Summary Judgment is GRANTED; 2) Plaintiff’s Motion for Summary Judgment is DENIED;
and 3) the ALJ’s decision is AFFIRMED.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
s/Sean F. Cox
Sean F. Cox
United States District Judge
Dated: March 13, 2018
I hereby certify that a copy of the foregoing document was served upon counsel of record on
March 13, 2018, by electronic and/or ordinary mail.
s/Jennifer McCoy
Case Manager

2