Opinion
CASE NO. 1:14-cv-212
02-18-2015
RHONDA S. FREEMAN, PLAINTIFF, v. COMMISSIONER OF SOCIAL SECURITY, DEFENDANT.
MEMORANDUM OPINION
Before the Court is the report and recommendation of the Magistrate Judge in the above-entitled action. (Doc. No. 20.) Under the relevant statute:
Within fourteen 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).
The R&R was filed on January 23, 2015. Under Fed.R.Civ.P. 6(d), an additional three days are added when computing service, making objections due February 9, 2015, which fell on a Monday.
No objections were filed on or before that deadline. 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), aff'd, 474 U.S. 140 (1985), reh'g denied, 474 U.S. 1111 (1986); see United States v. Walters, 638 F.2d 947 (6th Cir. 1981).
The Court has reviewed the Magistrate Judge's report and recommendation and accepts the same. Accordingly, the Court concludes, first, that it lacks subject matter jurisdiction to review the Commissioner's March 3, 2011 denial of plaintiff's application for supplemental security income benefits and, second, that the Commissioner's December 2, 2013 decision to deny disability insurance benefits was supported by substantial evidence and must be AFFIRMED.
IT IS SO ORDERED. Dated: February 18, 2015
/s/ _________
HONORABLE SARA LIOI
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE