Filed: Jan. 04, 2018
Latest Update: Jan. 04, 2018
Summary: MEMORANDUM OF OPINION AND ORDER BENITA Y. PEARSON , District Judge . An Administrative Law Judge ("ALJ") denied Plaintiff Albert Carpenter's application for Period of Disability, Disability Insurance Benefits, and Supplemental Social Security Income after a hearing in the above-captioned case. That decision became the final determination of the Commissioner of Social Security when the Appeals Council denied the request to review the ALJ's decision. The claimant sought judicial review of th
Summary: MEMORANDUM OF OPINION AND ORDER BENITA Y. PEARSON , District Judge . An Administrative Law Judge ("ALJ") denied Plaintiff Albert Carpenter's application for Period of Disability, Disability Insurance Benefits, and Supplemental Social Security Income after a hearing in the above-captioned case. That decision became the final determination of the Commissioner of Social Security when the Appeals Council denied the request to review the ALJ's decision. The claimant sought judicial review of the..
More
MEMORANDUM OF OPINION AND ORDER
BENITA Y. PEARSON, District Judge.
An Administrative Law Judge ("ALJ") denied Plaintiff Albert Carpenter's application for Period of Disability, Disability Insurance Benefits, and Supplemental Social Security Income after a hearing in the above-captioned case. That decision became the final determination of the Commissioner of Social Security when the Appeals Council denied the request to review the ALJ's decision. The claimant sought judicial review of the Commissioner's decision, and the Court referred the case to Magistrate Judge David A. Ruiz for preparation of a report and recommendation pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636 and Local Rule 72.2(b)(1).
Magistrate Judge Ruiz issued a Report and Recommendation (ECF No. 14), recommending that the Court affirm the decision of the Commission.
Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b)(2) provides that objections to a Report and Recommendation must be filed within 14 days after service. Objections to the magistrate judge's Report and Recommendation were, therefore, due on December 27, 2017. Neither party has filed objections, evidencing satisfaction with the magistrate judge's recommendations. Any further review by this Court would be a duplicative and inefficient use of the Court's limited resources. Thomas v. Arn, 728 F.2d 813 (6th Cir. 1984), aff'd, 474 U.S. 140 (1985); Howard v. Secretary of Health and Human Services, 932 F.2d 505 (6th Cir. 1991); United States v. Walters, 638 F.2d 947, 949-50 (6th Cir. 1981).
Accordingly, the Report and Recommendation of the magistrate judge is hereby adopted. The decision of the Commissioner of Social Security is affirmed. Judgment will be entered in favor of Defendant.
IT IS SO ORDERED.