Rios v. Social Security, Commissioner of
ORDER Accepting the Recommendation Contained in the Magistrate Judge's Report and Recommendation Dated November 28, 2016. Signed by District Judge Mark A. Goldsmith. (Sandusky, K)
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN
LORI ANN RIOS,
Case No. 10-CV-14443
HON. MARK A. GOLDSMITH
ORDER ACCEPTING THE RECOMMENDATION CONTAINED IN THE
MAGISTRATE JUDGE’S REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION DATED NOVEMBER
This matter is presently before the Court on the Report and Recommendation (R&R) of
Magistrate Judge Morris, issued on November 28, 2016. In the R&R, the Magistrate Judge
recommends that the Commissioner’s motion for entry of final judgment (Dkt. 22) be granted.
The parties have not filed objections to the R&R, and the time to do so has expired. See
Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b)(2). The failure to file a timely objection to an R&R constitutes a waiver of
the right to further judicial review. See Thomas v. Arn, 474 U.S. 140, 150 (1985) (“It does not
appear that Congress intended to require district court review of a magistrate’s factual or legal
conclusions, under a de novo or any other standard, when neither party objects to those findings.”);
Smith v. Detroit Fed’n of Teachers, 829 F.2d 1370, 1373-1374 (6th Cir. 1987) (failure to file
objection to R&R “waived subsequent review of the matter”); Cephas v. Nash, 328 F.3d 98, 108
(2d Cir. 2003) (“As a rule, a party’s failure to object to any purported error or omission in a
magistrate judge’s report waives further judicial review of the point.”); Lardie v. Birkett, 221 F.
Supp. 2d 806, 807 (E.D. Mich. 2002) (“As to the parts of the report and recommendation to which
no party has objected, the Court need not conduct a review by any standard.”). However, there is
some authority that a district court is required to review the R&R for clear error. See Fed. R. Civ.
P. 72 Advisory Committee Note Subdivision (b) (“When no timely objection is filed, the court
need only satisfy itself that there is no clear error on the face of the record in order to accept the
recommendation.”). Therefore, the Court has reviewed the R&R for clear error. On the face of
the record, the Court finds no clear error and accepts the recommendation.
Accordingly, the Commissioner’s motion for entry of final judgment (Dkt. 22) is granted.
Dated: January 27, 2017
s/Mark A. Goldsmith
MARK A. GOLDSMITH
United States District Judge
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
The undersigned certifies that the foregoing document was served upon counsel of record and any
unrepresented parties via the Court's ECF System to their respective email or First Class U.S. mail
addresses disclosed on the Notice of Electronic Filing on January 27, 2017.
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?