Elawyers Elawyers
Ohio| Change

CHIPPS v. COMMISSIONER OF SOCIAL SECURITY, 14-11194. (2015)

Court: District Court, E.D. Michigan Number: infdco20150831952 Visitors: 11
Filed: Aug. 28, 2015
Latest Update: Aug. 28, 2015
Summary: ORDER ACCEPTING AND ADOPTING REPORT & RECOMMENDATION SEAN F. COX , District Judge . This is a social security appeal. On March 21, 2014, Plaintiff Heather A. Chipps filed her Complaint against the Commissioner of Social Security, appealing an Administrative Law Judge's denial of her application for disability insurance and supplemental security income benefits. (Doc. #1). The parties filed cross-motions for summary judgment. (Pl. Mo., Doc. #19; Def.'s Mo., Doc. #23). The motions were ulti
More

ORDER ACCEPTING AND ADOPTING REPORT & RECOMMENDATION

This is a social security appeal. On March 21, 2014, Plaintiff Heather A. Chipps filed her Complaint against the Commissioner of Social Security, appealing an Administrative Law Judge's denial of her application for disability insurance and supplemental security income benefits. (Doc. #1).

The parties filed cross-motions for summary judgment. (Pl. Mo., Doc. #19; Def.'s Mo., Doc. #23). The motions were ultimately referred to Magistrate Judge Charles E. Binder for issuance of a Report and Recommendation pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) and (C). (Doc. #3).

On August 5, 2015, Magistrate Judge Binder issued a Report and Recommendation ("R&R") wherein he recommended that this Court DENY Plaintiff's Motion for Summary Judgment, GRANT Defendant's Motion for Summary Judgment, and AFFIRM the Commissioner's denial of benefits. (R&R, Doc. #26).

Pursuant to Civil Rule 72, a party objecting to the recommended disposition of a matter by a Magistrate Judge must file objections to the R&R within fourteen (14) days after being served with a copy of the R&R. Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b)(2). "The district judge must determine de novo any part of the magistrate judge's disposition that has been properly objected to." Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b)(3).

Neither party has filed objections to the R&R and the time for doing so has passed. Furthermore, the Court agrees with the Magistrate Judge's recommendation. Therefore, the Court hereby ADOPTS the August 5, 2015 R&R. IT IS ORDERED that Plaintiff's Motion for Summary Judgment (Doc. #19) is DENIED, Defendant's Motion for Summary Judgment (Doc. #23) is GRANTED, and this case is DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Source:  Leagle

Can't find what you're looking for?

Post a free question on our public forum.
Ask a Question
Search for lawyers by practice areas.
Find a Lawyer