Larner v. Social Security, Commissioner of
Filing
17
ORDER Adopting 16 Report and Recommendation. Signed by District Judge Terrence G. Berg. (Chubb, A)
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN
SOUTHERN DIVISION
MICHELLE LARNER,
Plaintiff,
Case No. 13-11464
HON. TERRENCE G. BERG
HON. R. STEVEN WHALEN
v.
COMMISSIONER OF SOCIAL
SECURITY,
Defendant.
/
ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION
This matter is before the Court on Magistrate Judge R. Steven Whalen’s
April 11, 2014 Report and Recommendation (Dkt. 16), recommending that
Defendant’s Motion for Summary Judgment (Dkt. 15) be GRANTED, that Plaintiff’s
Motion for Summary Judgment (Dkt. 8) be DENIED, and that the findings of the
Commissioner be AFFIRMED.
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
recommendations. 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 review the record. See Thomas v. Arn, 474 U.S. 140, 149-52
(1985). Nevertheless, the Court has carefully reviewed the Magistrate Judge’s
Report and Recommendation of April 11, 2014 (Dkt. 16), and does hereby ACCEPT
and ADOPT it as this Court’s findings of fact and conclusions of law.
Accordingly, Defendant’s Motion for Summary Judgment (Dkt. 15) is
GRANTED, Plaintiff’s Motion for Summary Judgment (Dkt. 8) is DENIED, and
the decision of the Commissioner, as authored by Administrative Law Judge
Kathleen Eiler, is AFFIRMED.
SO ORDERED.
Dated: April 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 April 30,
2014, using the CM/ECF system, which will send notification to the 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?