United States District Court, Eastern District of Michigan, Southern Division
Deondra S. Parks, Plaintiff,
Commissioner of Social Security, Defendant.
Mona K. Majzoub, Magistrate Judge.
ORDER ACCEPTING AND ADOPTING REPORT & RECOMMENDATION
Sean F. Cox, United States District Judge.
Plaintiff brought this action seeking judicial review of the Commissioner of Social Security’s determination that she is not entitled to social security benefits for her physical and mental impairments under 42 U.S.C. § 405(g). (Doc. #1).
Some time thereafter, Plaintiff and Defendant filed cross-motions for summary judgment. (Doc. #14 and Doc. #15). The motions were referred to Magistrate Judge Mona K. Majzoub for Report and Recommendation pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §§ 636(b)(1)(B). (Doc. #4).
On February 17, 2015, Magistrate Judge Majzoub issued a Report and Recommendation (“R&R”) wherein she recommended that the Court GRANT IN PART AND DENY IN PART Plaintiff’s Motion for Summary Judgment, DENY Defendant’s Motion for Summary Judgment, and remand the case to the ALJ for “proper discussion and consideration of Dr. Tobia’s opinion with regard to Plaintiff’s functional limitations and so that the ALJ can clarify his findings with regard to Plaintiff’s credibility.” (Feb. 17, 2015 R&R, Doc. # 18).
Pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P. 72(b), a party objecting to the recommended disposition of a matter by a Magistrate Judge must file objections to the R&R within fourteen (14) days after being served with a copy of the R&R. Fed.R.Civ.P. 72(b)(2). “The district judge must determine de novo any part of the magistrate judge’s disposition that has been properly objected to.” Fed.R.Civ.P. 72(b)(3).
The time for filing objections to the R&R has expired and the docket reflects that neither party has filed objections to the R&R. Furthermore, the Court agrees with the Magistrate Judge’s recommendation. Therefore, the Court hereby ADOPTS the February 17, 2015 R&R. IT IS ORDERED that Plaintiff’s Motion for Summary Judgment (Doc. #14) is GRANTED IN PART and DENIED IN PART, Defendant’s Motion for Summary Judgment (Doc. #15) is DENIED, and this matter is REMANDED ...