Arthur v. Commissioner of Social Security
Order: The Magistrate Judge's R&R (Doc. 13 ) be, and the same hereby is, adopted as the order of this Court. Plaintiff's complaint (Doc. 1 ) be, and the same hereby is dismissed with prejudice. Judge James G. Carr on 2/28/17. (Attachments: # 1 R&R)(C,D)
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO
Richard P. Arthur,
Case No. 3:16CV765
Carolyn W. Colvin,
Acting Commissioner of Social Security,
This is a Social Security case in which the plaintiff, Richard Arthur, appeals from the
Commissioner’s denial of his application for benefits.
An administrative law judge found that Arthur, though suffering from many severe
impairments, was nevertheless capable of performing a significant number of jobs that exist in the
national economy. (Doc. 9 at 31–32).
Pending is Magistrate Judge Greenberg’s Report and Recommendation (R&R), which
concluded that substantial evidence supports the ALJ’s decision. (Doc. 13). In particular, the
Magistrate Judge found that the ALJ properly applied the treating-physician rule, evaluated the
record as a whole, and adequately justified Arthur’s residual functional capacity. (Id. at 18–26).
Arthur did not object to the R&R and has thus waived his right to a “de novo determination
by the district court of an issue covered in the report.” Amison v. Legg, 2015 WL 853526, *1 (N.D.
Ohio) (Lioi, J.); see also Smith v. Detroit Fed’n of Teachers Local 231, 829 F.2d 1370, 1373 (6th
Cir. 1987) (same).
It is, therefore,
The Magistrate Judge’s R&R (Doc. 13) be, and the same hereby is, adopted as the
order of this Court; and
Plaintiff’s complaint (Doc. 1) be, and the same hereby is dismissed with prejudice.
/s/ James G. Carr
Sr. U.S. 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?