Bentley v. Social Security

Filing 18

ORDER Adopting 17 Report and Recommendation. Signed by District Judge Terrence G. Berg. (AChu)

Download PDF
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN SOUTHERN DIVISION   SHANON DAWN BENTLEY, Plaintiff, v. Case No. 17-13662 Hon. Terrence G. Berg COMMISSIONER OF SOCIAL SECURITY, Defendant. ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION This matter is before the Court on Magistrate Judge Stephanie Dawkins Davis’ Report and Recommendation of February 22, 2019 (ECF No. 17) recommending that Defendant’s Motion for Summary Judgment (ECF No. 15) be granted and Plaintiff’s Motion for Summary Judgment (ECF No. 13) be denied. The Court has reviewed the Magistrate Judge’s Report and Recommendation. The law provides that either party may serve and file written objections “[w]ithin fourteen days after being served with a copy” of a report and recommendation. 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1). The district court will make a “de novo determination of those portions of the report . . . to which objection is made.” Id. Where, as here, neither party objects to the report, the district court is not obligated to independently review the record. 1   See Thomas v. Arn, 474 U.S. 140, 149-52 (1985). The Court will therefore accept the Magistrate’s Report and Recommendation of February 22, 2019 as this Court’s findings of fact and conclusions of law. Accordingly, it is hereby ORDERED that Magistrate Judge Davis’s Report and Recommendation of February 22, 2019 is ACCEPTED and ADOPTED. It is FURTHER ORDERED that Plaintiff’s Motion for Summary Judgment is DENIED, Defendants’ Motion for Summary Judgment is GRANTED, and Plaintiff’s claims are DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE. SO ORDERED. Dated: March 13, 2019 s/Terrence G. Berg TERRENCE G. BERG UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE Certificate of Service I hereby certify that this Order was electronically filed, and the parties and/or counsel of record were served on March 13, 2019. s/A. Chubb Case Manager   2  

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?