Elawyers Elawyers
Ohio| Change

Rogers v. Commissioner of Social Security, 17-14151. (2019)

Court: District Court, E.D. Michigan Number: infdco20190311a48 Visitors: 1
Filed: Mar. 08, 2019
Latest Update: Mar. 08, 2019
Summary: ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION AND GRANTING PLAINTIFF'S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT AND DENYING DEFENDANT'S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT MARIANNE O. BATTANI , District Judge . Plaintiff Charles Wayne Rogers brings this action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. 405(g), challenging the final decision of the Commissioner denying his application for Supplemental Security Disability Income Benefits under Title XVI of the Social Security Act, 42 U.S.C. 1381 et seq. The case was referred to Mag
More

ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION AND GRANTING PLAINTIFF'S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT AND DENYING DEFENDANT'S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT

Plaintiff Charles Wayne Rogers brings this action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 405(g), challenging the final decision of the Commissioner denying his application for Supplemental Security Disability Income Benefits under Title XVI of the Social Security Act, 42 U.S.C. § 1381 et seq. The case was referred to Magistrate Judge Elizabeth A. Stafford pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) to review the final decision.

The parties filed cross-motions for summary judgment. In a Report and Recommendation ("R&R") dated January 17, 2019, Magistrate Judge Stafford recommended that Plaintiff's motion be granted and Defendant's motion be denied and the matter be remanded under sentence four of 42 U.S.C. § 405(g) for further consideration consistent with this report and recommendation. In her R&R, the Magistrate Judge informed the parties that objections to the R&R needed to be filed within 14 days of service and that a party's failure to file objections would waive any further right of appeal. (ECF No. 19 at Page 12).

Neither party filed an objection. Because no objection has been filed in this case, the parties waived their right to de novo review and appeal. Moreover, this Court agrees with the thorough analysis contained in the R&R.

Accordingly, the Court ADOPTS the Magistrate Judge's recommendation, GRANTS Plaintiff's Motion for Summary Judgment, DENIES Defendant's Motion for Summary Judgment and REMANDS this matter under sentence four of 42 U.S.C. § 405(g) for further consideration consistent with this 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