Hamilton v. Commissioner of Social Security, 17-cv-11551. (2018)
Court: District Court, E.D. Michigan
Number: infdco20180726b68
Visitors: 16
Filed: Jul. 25, 2018
Latest Update: Jul. 25, 2018
Summary: ORDER ACCEPTING AND ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION [18], GRANTING DEFENDANT'S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT [17], AND DENYING PLAINTIFF'S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT [15] GERSHWIN A. DRAIN , District Judge . This matter is before the Court on the parties' Cross-Motions for Summary Judgment as to Plaintiff Ruth Hope Hamilton's claim for judicial review of Defendant Commissioner of Social Security's denial of her application for Supplemental Security Income under the Social Security Act (t
Summary: ORDER ACCEPTING AND ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION [18], GRANTING DEFENDANT'S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT [17], AND DENYING PLAINTIFF'S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT [15] GERSHWIN A. DRAIN , District Judge . This matter is before the Court on the parties' Cross-Motions for Summary Judgment as to Plaintiff Ruth Hope Hamilton's claim for judicial review of Defendant Commissioner of Social Security's denial of her application for Supplemental Security Income under the Social Security Act (th..
More
ORDER ACCEPTING AND ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION [18], GRANTING DEFENDANT'S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT [17], AND DENYING PLAINTIFF'S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT [15]
GERSHWIN A. DRAIN, District Judge.
This matter is before the Court on the parties' Cross-Motions for Summary Judgment as to Plaintiff Ruth Hope Hamilton's claim for judicial review of Defendant Commissioner of Social Security's denial of her application for Supplemental Security Income under the Social Security Act (the "Act"). See Dkt. No. 1. The matter was referred to Magistrate Judge David R. Grand, who issued a Report and Recommendation on April 18, 2018. See Dkt. No. 18.
Magistrate Judge Grand recommended that the Court deny Plaintiff's Motion for Summary Judgment and grant Defendant's Motion for Summary Judgment. See id. He determined that substantial evidence in the record supports the Administrative Law Judge's conclusion that Plaintiff is not disabled under the Act. Neither party has objected to the Magistrate Judge's Report and Recommendation, and the deadline for filing objections has passed. See 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C).
The Court has reviewed the parties' briefing and the Magistrate Judge's Report and Recommendation. And the Court agrees with the Magistrate Judge's conclusions. Accordingly, the Court hereby ACCEPTS and ADOPTS Magistrate Judge Grand's April 18, 2018 Report and Recommendation [18]. Defendant's Motion for Summary Judgment [17] is GRANTED, and the Plaintiff's Motion for Summary Judgment [15] is DENIED.
This cause of action, therefore, is dismissed.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Source: Leagle