Styen v. Commissioner of Social Security

Filing 19

Memorandum Opinion: The Court has reviewed the Magistrate Judge's report and recommendation and accepts the same. Accordingly, the Court concludes that the Commissioner's decision denying plaintiff's claim for disability insurance benefits and supplemental security income was supported by substantial evidence and must be affirmed. (Related Doc # 18 ). Judge Sara Lioi on 2/4/2013. (P,J)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO
EASTERN DIVISION
RICK A. STYEN,
PLAINTIFF,
vs.
COMMISSIONER OF SOCIAL
SECURITY,
DEFENDANTS.

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

CASE NO. 4:12CV455
JUDGE SARA LIOI
MEMORANDUM OPINION

Before the Court is the report and recommendation of the Magistrate Judge in the
above-entitled action. (Doc. No. 36.) Under the relevant statute:
Within fourteen days after being served with a copy, any party may serve and file
written objections to such proposed findings and recommendations as provided by
rules of court. A judge of the court shall make a de novo determination of those
portions of the report or specified proposed findings or recommendations to which
objection is made. [. . .]
28 U.S.C. ' 636(b)(1)(C).
The R&R was filed on January 14, 2013, and was immediately served
electronically. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 5(b)(2)(E). Under Fed. R. Civ. P. 6(a)(1) and (d), when
computing time for filing objections, January 14th is excluded, every day thereafter is counted, and
three additional days are added. Therefore, objections were due on January 31, 2013.
No objections were filed on or before that deadline. The failure to file written
objections to a Magistrate Judge’s report and recommendation constitutes a waiver of a de novo
determination by the district court of an issue covered in the report. Thomas v. Arn, 728 F.2d 813

(6th Cir. 1984), aff’d, 474 U.S. 140 (1985), reh’g denied, 474 U.S. 1111 (1986); see United States
v. Walters, 638 F.2d 947 (6th Cir. 1981).
The Court has reviewed the Magistrate Judge’s report and recommendation and
accepts the same. Accordingly, the Court concludes that the Commissioner’s decision denying
plaintiff’s claim for disability insurance benefits and supplemental security income was supported
by substantial evidence and must be AFFIRMED.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: February 4, 2013
HONORABLE SARA LIOI
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE