Lewis v. Social Security, Commissioner of
Filing
19
ORDER Adopting 18 Report and Recommendation, Denying 15 Motion for Summary Judgment filed by Defendant, Granting in Part 14 Motion for Summary Judgment filed by Tondra M. Lewis, and REMANDING CASE to Social Security Commissioner. Signed by District Judge David M. Lawson. (SPin)
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN
SOUTHERN DIVISION
TONDRA M. LEWIS,
Plaintiff,
Case Number 18-11270
Honorable David M. Lawson
Magistrate Judge David R. Grand
v.
COMMISSIONER OF SOCIAL SECURITY,
Defendant.
/
ORDER ADOPTING MAGISTRATE JUDGE’S REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION,
GRANTING IN PART PLAINTIFF’S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT,
DENYING DEFENDANT’S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT, REVERSING
THE DECISION OF THE COMMISSIONER, AND REMANDING FOR FURTHER
PROCEEDINGS PURSUANT TO SENTENCE FOUR OF 42 U.S.C. § 405(G)
Presently before the Court is the report issued on July 1, 2019 by Magistrate Judge David
R. Grand pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b), recommending that the Court grant in part the plaintiff’s
motion for summary judgment, deny the defendant’s motion for summary judgment, reverse the
decision of the Commissioner, and remand the case for further proceedings under sentence four of
42 U.S.C. § 405(g). Although the magistrate judge’s report stated that the parties to this action
may object to and seek review of the recommendation within fourteen days of service of the report,
no objections have been filed.
The parties’ failure to file objections to the report and
recommendation waives any further right to appeal. Smith v. Detroit Fed’n 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 matter. Thomas v. Arn, 474
U.S. 140, 149 (1985). However, the Court agrees with the findings and conclusions of the
magistrate judge.
Accordingly, it is ORDERED that the magistrate judge’s report and recommendation
(ECF No. 18) is ADOPTED.
It is further ORDERED that the plaintiff’s motion for summary judgment (ECF No. 14) is
GRANTED IN PART. The plaintiff’s request to remand the case is GRANTED, but her request
for the Court to order an award of benefits is DENIED.
It is further ORDERED that the defendant’s motion for summary judgment (ECF No. 15)
is DENIED.
It is further ORDERED that the decision of the Commissioner is REVERSED.
It is further ORDERED that the matter is REMANDED to the Commissioner for further
proceedings pursuant to sentence four of 42 U.S.C. § 405(g). On remand the administrative law
judge shall consider all of the medical opinions of record, elicit additional testimony from a
vocational expert if necessary, and provide good reasons for her findings.
s/David M. Lawson
DAVID M. LAWSON
United States District Judge
Date: July 16, 2019
PROOF OF SERVICE
The undersigned certifies that a copy of the foregoing order was
served upon each attorney or party of record herein by
electronic means or first class U.S. mail on July 16, 2019.
s/Susan K. Pinkowski
SUSAN K. PINKOWSKI
-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?