Hatton v. COLVIN
Filing
22
ORDER Adopting 21 Report and Recommendation. Signed by District Judge Terrence G. Berg. (AChu)
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN
SOUTHERN DIVISION
DEBORAH L. HATTON,
Plaintiff,
Case No. 16-14463
Hon. Terrence G. Berg
Hon. Stephanie Dawkins
Davis
v.
NANCY A BERRYHILL,
ACTING COMMISSIONER
OF SOCIAL SECURITY,
Defendant.
ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION
(DKT. 21)
This matter is before the Court on Magistrate Judge Stephanie Davis Dawkins February 14, 2018 Report and Recommendation (Dkt. 21), recommending that Plaintiff’s Motion for Summary
Judgment (Dkt. 17) be DENIED, and Defendant’s Cross Motion
for Summary Judgment (Dkt. 19) be GRANTED.
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 a report and recommendation.
1
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). The Court will
therefore accept the Magistrate’s Report and Recommendation of
December 20, 2017 as this Court’s findings of fact and conclusions
of law.
Accordingly, it is hereby ORDERED that Magistrate Judge
Davis’ Report and Recommendation of February 14, 2018 is ACCEPTED and ADOPTED. It is FURTHER ORDERED that
Defendants’ Motion for Summary Judgment is GRANTED and
the findings of the Commissioner AFFIRMED.
SO ORDERED.
Dated: March 12, 2018
s/Terrence G. Berg
TERRENCE G. BERG
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
2
Certificate of Service
I hereby certify that this Order was electronically filed,
and the parties and/or counsel of record were served on March
12, 2018.
s/A. Chubb
Case Manager
3
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?