Elawyers Elawyers
Washington| Change

Jozefiak v. Commissioner of Social Security, 17-12713. (2018)

Court: District Court, E.D. Michigan Number: infdco20180925c54 Visitors: 23
Filed: Sep. 24, 2018
Latest Update: Sep. 24, 2018
Summary: ORDER ADOPTING MAGISTRATE JUDGE'S REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION MARIANNE O. BATTANI , District Judge . Plaintiff Christopher Jozefiak brings this action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. 405(g), challenging the final decision of the Defendant Commissioner of Social Security denying his application for disability insurance benefits under Title II of the Social Security Act, 42 U.S.C. 401 et seq. The case was referred to Magistrate Judge David R. Grand pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 636(b)(1)(B) for review o
More

ORDER ADOPTING MAGISTRATE JUDGE'S REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION

Plaintiff Christopher Jozefiak brings this action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 405(g), challenging the final decision of the Defendant Commissioner of Social Security denying his application for disability insurance benefits under Title II of the Social Security Act, 42 U.S.C. § 401 et seq. The case was referred to Magistrate Judge David R. Grand pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) for review of the Commissioner's decision.

The parties filed cross-motions for summary judgment. In a report and recommendation ("R & R") dated May 22, 2018, the Magistrate Judge recommended that the Court grant in part Plaintiff's motion for summary judgment, deny Defendant's motion for summary judgment, and remand this matter to the Defendant Commissioner under sentence four of 42 U.S.C. § 405(g). The Magistrate Judge also informed the parties that any desired objections to the R & R were to be filed within 14 days of service of the R & R, and that a party's failure to file objections would operate to waive any further right of appeal. (Dkt. 11, R & R at 12.)

Neither party has filed objections to the R & R. Because no objections have been filed, the parties have waived their right to de novo review and appeal. Moreover, having reviewed the R & R and the remainder of the record, this Court fully concurs in the Magistrate Judge's analysis and recommended disposition of this case.

Accordingly, the Court ADOPTS the Magistrate Judge's May 22, 2018 report and recommendation (Dkt. 11), GRANTS IN PART Plaintiff's motion for summary judgment (Dkt. 8), and DENIES Defendant's motion for summary judgment (Dkt. 9). This matter will be remanded to the Defendant Commissioner under sentence four of 42 U.S.C. § 405(g) for further proceedings in accordance with the Magistrate Judge's report and recommendation.

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