Crouse v. Commissioner of Social Security Administration
Filing
28
Memorandum, Opinion, and Order that the report and recommendation of the Magistrate Judge is hereby adopted (Doc. # 27 ). The Commissioners decision is AFFIRMED. The Court certifies, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(3), that an appeal from this decision could not be taken in good faith. Referral terminated. Judge John R. Adams on 5/22/14. (K,C)
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO
EASTERN DIVISION
CONNIE CROUSE,
Plaintiff,
-vsCOMMISSIONER OF SOCIAL,
SECURITY
Defendant.
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
CASE NO. 1:13-cv-00874
JUDGE JOHN R. ADAMS
MEMORANDUM OF OPINION
AND ORDER
Plaintiff Connie Crouse sought judicial review of the Commissioner’s decision denying
her application for disability insurance benefits and supplemental security income. This Court
referred the case to Magistrate Judge William H. Baughman, Jr. for preparation of a report and
recommendation pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636 and Local Rules 72.2(b)(1). The Magistrate Judge
submitted a report and recommendation (Doc. 27) recommending that the Court AFFIRM the
Commissioner’s decision.
Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b)(2) provides that the parties may object to a report and
recommendation within fourteen (14) days after service. No objections have been filed within
the 14-day period. Any further review by this Court would be a duplicative and inefficient use of
the Court’s limited resources. Thomas v. Arn, 728 F.2d 813 (6th Cir. 1984); Howard v. Sec’y of
Health and Human Servs., 932 F.2d 505 (6th Cir. 1991); United States v. Walters, 638 F.2d 947,
949-50 (6th Cir. 1981).
Accordingly, the report and recommendation of the Magistrate Judge is hereby adopted.
The Commissioner’s decision is AFFIRMED. The Court certifies, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §
1915(a)(3), that an appeal from this decision could not be taken in good faith.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated: May 22, 2014
/s/ John R. Adams_______________
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
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?