Beck-Patterson v. Commissioner of Social Security Administration

Filing 16

Memorandum of Opinion and Order For the reasons set forth herein, the Report and Recommendation of the Magistrate Judge is hereby adopted. ECF No. 15 . The decision of the Commissioner of Social Security is affirmed. Judgment will be entered in favor of Defendant. Judge Benita Y. Pearson on 5/11/2015. (JLG)

PEARSON, J.
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO
EASTERN DIVISION
DELORES BECK-PATTERSON,
Plaintiff,
v.
CAROLYN W. COLVIN,
ACTING COMMISSIONER OF
SOCIAL SECURITY,
Defendant.

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

CASE NO. 1:14CV0864

JUDGE BENITA Y. PEARSON

MEMORANDUM OF OPINION
AND ORDER

An Administrative Law Judge (“ALJ”) denied Plaintiff Delores Beck-Patterson’s
application for Disability Insurance Benefits (“DIB”) after a hearing in the above-captioned case.
That decision became the final determination of the Commissioner of Social Security when the
Appeals Council denied the request to review the ALJ’s decision. The claimant sought judicial
review of the Commissioner’s decision, and this Court referred the case to Magistrate Judge
George J. Limbert for preparation of a report and recommendation pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636
and Local Rule 72.2(b)(1). The Magistrate Judge submitted a Report and Recommendation
(ECF No. 15) recommending that the decision of the Commissioner be affirmed as supported by
substantial evidence. Specifically, the Magistrate Judge recommends that the Court find no
violation of the treating physician rule. ECF No. 15 at PageID #: 926. In addition, he
recommends that the Court find that the ALJ did not err in assigning great weight to the opinion
of Herschel Goren, M.D., a medical expert (“M.E.”). ECF No. 15 at PageID #: 927.

(1:14CV0864)
Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b)(2) provides that objections to a report and recommendation must be
filed within 14 days after service. Objections to the Magistrate Judge’s Report were, therefore,
due on April 23, 2015.1 Neither party has filed objections, evidencing satisfaction with the
Magistrate Judge’s recommendations. 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), aff’d, 474 U.S. 140 (1985); Howard v. Secretary of Health and Human Services, 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 decision of the Commissioner of Social Security is affirmed. Judgment will be entered in
favor of Defendant.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

May 11, 2015
Date

/s/ Benita Y. Pearson
Benita Y. Pearson
United States District Judge

1

Under Fed. R. Civ. P. 6(d), three days must be added to the fourteen-day time
period because Petitioner was served the Magistrate Judge’s Report by electronic mail.
See Dunn v. Commissioner of Social Sec., No. 00-1050, 2000 WL 1679496, at *1 (6th
Cir. Nov. 3, 2000) (citing former Fed. R. Civ. P. 6(e)); Electronic Filing Policies and
Procedures Manual (July 26, 2011) at 6.
2