Israel v. Saul

Filing 17

ORDER Adopting 16 Report and Recommendation for Granting 13 Motion for Summary Judgment filed by Tammy Israel, and Denying 14 Motion for Summary Judgment filed by Andrew Saul. Signed by District Judge Sean F. Cox. (JMcC)

Case 2:20-cv-11812-SFC-APP ECF No. 17, PageID.756 Filed 09/09/21 Page 1 of 2

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN
SOUTHERN DIVISION
Tammy A. Israel,
Plaintiff,
Civil Case No. 20-11812
v.
Commissioner of Social Security,

Sean F. Cox
United States District Court Judge

Defendant.
______________________________/
ORDER ADOPTING
8/13/21 REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION
Plaintiff Tammy Israel filed this action seeking judicial review of Defendant
Commissioner’s final decision denying her application for disability insurance and supplemental
security income benefits. The matter was referred to Magistrate Judge Anthony Patti for
determination of all non-dispositive motions under 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(A) and issuance of a
report and recommendation pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) and (C). Thereafter, the parties
filed cross-motions for summary judgment.
In a Report and Recommendation (“R&R”) issued on August 13, 2021, the magistrate
judge recommends that the Court: 1) grant Plaintiff’s motion for summary judgment; 2) deny the
Commissioner’s cross-motion for summary judgment; and 3) remand to the Commissioner for
actions specified in the R&R, “including a re-evaluation of the opinion evidence, an adequate
articulation as to why any discounted medical opinions were unsupported or inconsistent, and a
re-assessment and fuller explanation of the RFC to clarify the connection between the evidence
upon which the ALJ relies and the RFC’s various assessed limitations.” (R&R at 24).
1

Case 2:20-cv-11812-SFC-APP ECF No. 17, PageID.757 Filed 09/09/21 Page 2 of 2

Pursuant to FED. R. CIV. P. 72(b), a party objecting to the recommended disposition of a
matter by a Magistrate Judge must filed objections to the R&R within fourteen (14) days after
being served with a copy of the R&R. “The district judge to whom the case is assigned shall
make a de novo determination upon the record, or after additional evidence, of any portion of the
magistrate judge’s disposition to which specific written objection has been made.” Id.
The time for filing objections to the R&R has expired and the docket reflects that neither
party has filed objections to the R&R. The Court hereby ADOPTS the August 13, 2021 R&R.
IT IS ORDERED that Defendant’s Motion for Summary Judgment is DENIED.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Plaintiff’s Motion for Summary Judgment is
GRANTED and the matter is REMANDED to the Commissioner for actions specified in the
R&R, including a re-evaluation of the opinion evidence, an adequate articulation as to why any
discounted medical opinions were unsupported or inconsistent, and a re-assessment and fuller
explanation of the RFC to clarify the connection between the evidence upon which the ALJ
relies and the RFC’s various assessed limitations.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
s/Sean F. Cox
Sean F. Cox
United States District Judge
Dated: September 9, 2021

2