GONZALES v. COMMISSIONER OF SOCIAL SECURITY, 3:10 CV 2671. (2012)
Court: District Court, N.D. Ohio
Number: infdco20120306b30
Visitors: 8
Filed: Mar. 05, 2012
Latest Update: Mar. 05, 2012
Summary: MEMORANDUM OPINION DAVID A. KATZ, District Judge. Before the Court is the Report and Recommendation of the Magistrate Judge filed February 14, 2012 in the above-entitled action. Under the relevant statute: Within ten 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
Summary: MEMORANDUM OPINION DAVID A. KATZ, District Judge. Before the Court is the Report and Recommendation of the Magistrate Judge filed February 14, 2012 in the above-entitled action. Under the relevant statute: Within ten 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 ..
More
MEMORANDUM OPINION
DAVID A. KATZ, District Judge.
Before the Court is the Report and Recommendation of the Magistrate Judge filed February 14, 2012 in the above-entitled action. Under the relevant statute:
Within ten 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) (1982). In this case, the ten-day period has elapsed and no objections have been filed. 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) affirmed, 474 U.S. 140 (1985); see United States v. Walters, 638 F.2d 947 (6th Cir. 1981).
The Court has reviewed the Magistrate Judge's Report and Recommendation, and adopts that Report and Recommendation in its entirety. Case is remanded for additional proceedings as stated in the Report and Recommendation.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Source: Leagle
