Vedrode v. Comm'r of Soc. Sec.

Full title: NICOLE VEDRODE, Plaintiff, v. COMMISSIONER OF SOCIAL SECURITY, Defendant.

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

Date published: Sep 16, 2014

Case No. 13-cv-11420 (E.D. Mich. Sep. 16, 2014)

Opinion

Case No. 13-cv-11420

09-16-2014

NICOLE VEDRODE, Plaintiff, v. COMMISSIONER OF SOCIAL SECURITY, Defendant.

HONORABLE STEPHEN J. MURPHY, III

OPINION AND ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION (document no. 20), GRANTING COMMISSIONER'S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT (document no. 19), DENYING VEDRODE'S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT (document no. 17), AND DISMISSING CASE

The Social Security Administration denied plaintiff and claimant Nicole Vedrode's application for a period of disability and disability insurance benefits. An Administrative Law Judge issued the original decision. See ALJ Decision, ECF No. 13-2, at 19. The SSA Appeals Council declined to review the ruling. Vedrode then appealed to this Court. The Court referred the matter to a United States Magistrate Judge, and the parties filed cross motions for summary judgment. On August 8, 2014, the magistrate judge issued a Report and Recommendation suggesting that the Court grant the Commissioner of Social Security's motion and deny Vedrode's motion. Report, ECF No. 20.

A copy of the Report was served to both parties on August 8, 2014. Under Civil Rule 72(b), each party had fourteen days from the date of service to file any written objections to the recommended disposition. Neither party has filed any objections. De Novo review of the magistrate judge's findings is therefore not required. See Fed.R.Civ.P. 72(b)(3). The Court has reviewed the file and the Report, and finds that the magistrate judge's analysis is proper. Accordingly, the Court adopts the Report's findings and conclusions and will enter an appropriate judgment.

ORDER

WHEREFORE, it is hereby ORDERED that the Commissioner's motion for summary judgment (document no. 19) is GRANTED. This case is DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the magistrate judge's Report and Recommendation (document no. 20) is ADOPTED.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Vedrode's Motion for Summary Judgment (document no. 17) is DENIED.

SO ORDERED.

s/Stephen J. Murphy, III

STEPHEN J. MURPHY, III

United States District Judge
Dated: September 16, 2014 I hereby certify that a copy of the foregoing document was served upon the parties and/or counsel of record on September 16, 2014, by electronic and/or ordinary mail.

s/Carol Cohron

Case Manager