Perry et al v. Social Security, Commissioner of

Filing 26

ORDER Adopting 25 Report and Recommendation. Signed by District Judge Terrence G. Berg. (Chubb, A)

Download PDF
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN SOUTHERN DIVISION TILGHMAN COLE PERRY, JR., v. Case No. 13-10054 Plaintiff, HON. TERRENCE G. BERG HON. R. STEVEN WHALEN COMMISSIONER OF SOCIAL SECURITY, Defendant. / ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION (Dkt. 25) This matter is before the court on Magistrate Judge R. Steven Whalen’s January 8, 2014 Report and Recommendation (Dkt. 25), recommending that Plaintiff’s Motion for Summary Judgment (Dkt. 21) be GRANTED, that Defendant’s Motion for Summary Judgment (Dkt. 17) be DENIED, and that the case be REMANDED to the Commissioner for further proceedings, pursuant to sentence four of 42 U.S.C. § 405(g).1 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 the 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                                                              The fourth sentence of 42 U.S.C. § 405(g) states: "The court shall have power to enter, upon the pleadings and transcript of the record, a judgment affirming, modifying, or reversing the decision of the Commissioner of Social Security, with or without remanding the cause for a rehearing." 1 review the record. See Thomas v. Arn, 474 U.S. 140, 149-52 (1985). Nevertheless, the Court has carefully reviewed and does hereby accept the Magistrate Judge’s Report and Recommendation of January 8, 2014, as this Court’s findings of fact and conclusions of law. Accordingly, it is hereby ORDERED that Magistrate Judge Whalen’s Report and Recommendation of January 8, 2014 (Dkt. 25) is ACCEPTED and ADOPTED. It is FURTHER ORDERED that Plaintiff’s Motion for Summary Judgment (Dkt. 21) is GRANTED, Defendant’s Motion for Summary Judgment (Dkt. 17) is DENIED, and the case is REMANDED to the Commissioner, pursuant to sentence four of 42 U.S.C. § 405(g), for reconsideration of the weight given to the opinion of Plaintiff’s treating physician, Dr. Choung C. Cho. SO ORDERED. Dated: January 30, 2014 s/Terrence G. Berg TERRENCE G. BERG UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE Certificate of Service I hereby certify that this Order was electronically submitted on January 30, 2014, using the CM/ECF system, which will send notification to all parties. 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?