Demastus v. Commissioner of Social Security

Filing 18

Memorandum of Opinion and Order For the reasons set forth herein, the Court adopts the Magistrate Judge's Report and Recommendation. ECF No. 16 . The Court will vacate the decision of the Commissioner of Social Security and remand this case to the Commissioner for rehearing and a new decision. Judge Benita Y. Pearson on 2/13/2017. (JLG)

PEARSON, J.
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO
EASTERN DIVISION

SAMANTHA DEMASTUS,
Plaintiff,
v.
COMMISSIONER OF SOCIAL
SECURITY,
Defendant.

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

CASE NO. 5:16CV00836

JUDGE BENITA Y. PEARSON

MEMORANDUM OF OPINION
AND ORDER

An Administrative Law Judge (“ALJ”) denied Plaintiff Samantha Demastus’s application
for Disability Insurance Benefits and Supplemental Security Income 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 the Court referred the case
to Magistrate Judge Jonathan D. Greenberg 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
(ECF No. 16), recommending that the Court vacate the Commissioner’s decision and remand the
case to the ALJ so that the ALJ may “comprehensively set forth the reasons for the weight
assigned to a treating physician’s opinion.” ECF No. 16 at PageID #: 758.

(5:16CV00836)
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 and
Recommendation were, therefore, due on February 10, 2017. On February 7, 2017, the
Commissioner filed a Response to Magistrate Judge’s Report and Recommended Decision (ECF
No. 17), which states that the Commissioner will not be filing objections. Furthermore, Plaintiff
has not filed any 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 Court adopts the magistrate judge’s Report and Recommendation. The
Court will vacate the decision of the Commissioner of Social Security and remand this case to
the Commissioner for rehearing and a new decision.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

February 13, 2017
Date

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

2