Fick v Commissioner of Social Security
ORDER granting in part and denying in part 14 Motion for Summary Judgment; denying 17 Motion for Summary Judgment; adopting 19 Report and Recommendation. Signed by District Judge Arthur J. Tarnow. (MLan)
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN
THOMAS JAMES FICK,
Case No. 18-13427
SENIOR U.S. DISTRICT JUDGE
ARTHUR J. TARNOW
COMMISSIONER OF SOCIAL SECURITY,
U.S. MAGISTRATE JUDGE
DAVID R. GRAND
ORDER ADOPTING THE REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION ; GRANTING IN
PART AND DENYING IN PART PLAINTIFF’S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT
; AND DENYING DEFENDANT’S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT 
Plaintiff, Thomas James Fick, has sought judicial review of an Administrative
Law Judge (ALJ) decision denying his application for disability benefits. On
September 17, 2019, the Magistrate Judge issued a Report and Recommendation
(“R&R”) [Dkt. # 19] on the parties’ motions for summary judgment [14, 17]. Neither
party filed an objection to the R&R. The Magistrate Judge determined that the matter
should be remanded because the Administrative Law Judge (“ALJ”) discounted the
opinions of Mr. Fick’s treating mental health providers without supporting his
decision with substantial evidence from the record.
Page 1 of 2
The Court having reviewed the record, the Report and Recommendation 
is hereby ADOPTED and entered as the findings and conclusions of the Court.
IT IS ORDERED that Plaintiff’s Motion for Summary Judgment  is
GRANTED insofar as it seeks remand and DENIED insofar as it seeks an award of
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Defendant’s Motion for Summary
Judgment  is DENIED.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that this case be REMANDED to the
Commissioner for further proceedings consistent with this Order and the Report and
Dated: October 9, 2019
s/Arthur J. Tarnow
Arthur J. Tarnow
Senior United States District Judge
Page 2 of 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?