From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Beckrow v. Comm'r of Soc. Sec.

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN NORTHERN DIVISION
May 2, 2012
Case Number 11-13169 (E.D. Mich. May. 2, 2012)

Summary

refusing to indulge a similar argument because the plaintiff failed to "specify what additional limitations the ALJ should have, but did not, include in the RFC assessment"

Summary of this case from Cheney v. Comm'r of Soc. Sec.

Opinion

Case Number 11-13169

05-02-2012

TINA BECKROW, Plaintiff, v. COMMISSIONER OF SOCIAL SECURITY, Defendant.


Honorable Thomas L. Ludington


ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION, GRANTING PLAINTIFF'S

MOTION FOR REMAND, DENYING DEFENDANT'S MOTION FOR SUMMARY

JUDGMENT, AND REMANDING THE DECISION OF THE COMMISSIONER

United States Magistrate Judge Laurie J. Michelson issued a report and recommendation (ECF No. 16) on April 12, 2012, recommending that the Court grant Plaintiff's motion for remand (ECF No. 11), deny Defendant's motion for summary judgment (ECF No. 12), and that, pursuant to sentence four of 42 U.S.C. § 405(g), the decision of the Commissioner be remanded. Either party may serve and file written objections "[w]ithin fourteen days after being served with a copy" of the report and recommendations. 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1). The district court will make a "de novo determination of those portions of the report . . . to which objection is made." Id. Where, as here, neither party objects to the report, the district court is not obligated to independently review the record. Thomas v. Arn, 474 U.S. 140, 149-52 (1985).

Accordingly, it is ORDERED that Judge Michelson's report and recommendation (ECF No. 16) is ADOPTED.

It is further ORDERED that Plaintiff's motion for remand (ECF No. 11) is GRANTED. It is further ORDERED that the Defendant's motion for summary judgment (ECF No. 12) is DENIED.

It is further ORDERED that the decision of the Commissioner is REMANDED for further consideration of Plaintiff's application for Disability Insurance Benefits in accordance with the guidance provided by Judge Michelson's report and recommendation (ECF No. 16).

______________________

THOMAS L. LUDINGTON

United States District Judge

PROOF OF SERVICE

The undersigned certifies that a copy of the foregoing order was served upon each attorney or party of record herein by electronic means or first class U.S. mail on May 2, 2012.

TRACY A. JACOBS


Summaries of

Beckrow v. Comm'r of Soc. Sec.

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN NORTHERN DIVISION
May 2, 2012
Case Number 11-13169 (E.D. Mich. May. 2, 2012)

refusing to indulge a similar argument because the plaintiff failed to "specify what additional limitations the ALJ should have, but did not, include in the RFC assessment"

Summary of this case from Cheney v. Comm'r of Soc. Sec.
Case details for

Beckrow v. Comm'r of Soc. Sec.

Case Details

Full title:TINA BECKROW, Plaintiff, v. COMMISSIONER OF SOCIAL SECURITY, Defendant.

Court:UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN NORTHERN DIVISION

Date published: May 2, 2012

Citations

Case Number 11-13169 (E.D. Mich. May. 2, 2012)

Citing Cases

Cheney v. Comm'r of Soc. Sec.

tions the ALJ should have pulled from Dr. Thoen's opinion, Cheney remains silent. See Shinseki v. Sanders,…