OPINION AND ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION [#19] TO DENY PLAINTIFF'S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT [#14] AND TO GRANT DEFENDANT'S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT [#15]

DENISE PAGE HOOD, Chief District Judge.

This matter is before the Court on a Report and Recommendation (Doc # 19) filed by Magistrate Judge Anthony P. Patti on Plaintiff Lori Deshalla's Motion for Summary Judgment (Doc # 14), and Defendant Commissioner of Social Security's Motion for Summary Judgment (Doc # 15). To date, no objections were filed to the Report and Recommendation, and the time to file such has passed. The Court ACCEPTS and ADOPTS the Report and Recommendation, DENIES Deshalla's Motion for Summary Judgment and GRANTS the Commissioner's Motion for Summary Judgment.

The background facts of this matter are adequately set forth in the Magistrate Judge's Report and Recommendation, and the Court adopts them here.

The standard of review by the district court when examining a Report and Recommendation is set forth in 28 U.S.C. § 636. This Court "shall make a de novo determination of those portions of the report or the specified proposed findings or recommendations to which an objection is made." 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C). The court "may accept, reject, or modify, in whole or in part, the findings or recommendations made by the magistrate judge." Id. In order to preserve the right to appeal the magistrate judge's recommendation, a party must file objections to the Report and Recommendation within fourteen (14) days of service of the Report and Recommendation. Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b)(2). Failure to file specific objections constitutes a waiver of any further right of appeal. Thomas v. Arn, 474 U.S. 140, 155 (1985); Howard v. Sec'y of Health & Human Servs., 932 F.2d 505, 508-09 (6th Cir. 1991); United States v. Walters, 638 F.2d 947, 949-50 (6th Cir. 1981).

After review of the Magistrate Judge's Report and Recommendation, the Court finds that his findings and conclusions are correct. The Court agrees with the Magistrate Judge that the Administrative Law Judge ("ALJ") was correct in finding that Plaintiff's severe impairments did not meet or equal any impairment listed in 20 C.F.R. Part 404, Subpart P, Appendix 1 (Doc # 12-2, Pg ID 31). The ALJ was not required to "spell[] out every consideration that went into the step three determination." Bledsoe v. Barnhart, 165 F. App'x 408, 411 (6th Cir. 2006). The ALJ provided sufficient support for its conclusion throughout the opinion. (see Doc # 12-2, Pg ID 34, 35, 37) The Court also agrees with the Magistrate Judge that the ALJ provided substantial evidence for the decision to give the opinion evidence of Deshalla's treating physician less than controlling weight. (see Doc # 12-2, Pg ID 34-36)

Accordingly,

IT IS ORDERED that Magistrate Judge Anthony P. Patti's Report and Recommendation (Doc # 19) is ACCEPTED and ADOPTED as this Court's findings of fact and conclusions of law.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Defendant Commissioner of Social Security's Motion for Summary Judgment (Doc # 15) is GRANTED.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Plaintiff Deshalla's Motion for Summary Judgment (Doc # 14) is DENIED.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that this action is DISMISSED with prejudice.