Collins v. Social Security ( 2019 )

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN SOUTHERN DIVISION BERNARD D. COLLINS, Plaintiff, Case No. 18-12401 Honorable Laurie J. Michelson v. Magistrate Judge Stephanie Dawkins Davis COMMISSIONER OF SOCIAL SECURITY, Defendant. ORDER ACCEPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION [18], GRANTING DEFENDANT’S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT [17] AND DENYING PLAINTIFF’S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT [13] Before the Court is Magistrate Judge Stephanie Dawkins Davis’ June 30, 2019, Report and Recommendation. (ECF No. 18.) At the conclusion of her report, Magistrate Judge Davis notified the parties that they were required to file any objections within 14 days of service, as provided in Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 72(b)(2) and Eastern District of Michigan Local Rule 72.1(d), and that “[f]ailure to file specific objections constitutes a waiver of any further right of appeal.” (ECF No. 18, PageID.661.) It is now July 26, 2019. As such, the time to file objections has expired. And no objections have been filed. The Court finds that the parties’ failure to object is a procedural default, waiving review of the Magistrate Judge’s findings by this Court. In United States v. Walters, 638 F.2d 947, 949–50 (6th Cir. 1981), the Sixth Circuit established a rule of procedural default, holding that “a party shall file objections with the district court or else waive right to appeal.” And in Thomas v. Arn, 474 U.S. 140, 144 (1985), the Supreme Court explained that the Sixth Circuit’s waiver-of- appellate-review rule rested on the assumption “that the failure to object may constitute a procedural default waiving review even at the district court level.” 474 U.S. at 149; see also Garrison v. Equifax Info. Servs., LLC, No. 10-13990, 2012 WL 1278044, at *8 (E.D. Mich. Apr. 16, 2012) (“The Court is not obligated to review the portions of the report to which no objection was made.” (citing Thomas, 474 U.S. at 149–52)). The Court further held that this rule violates neither the Federal Magistrates Act nor the Federal Constitution. The Court therefore finds that the parties have waived further review of the Magistrate Judge’s Report and accepts her recommended disposition. It follows that the Commissioner’s motion for summary judgment (ECF No. 18) is GRANTED and the Plaintiff’s motion (ECF No. 13) is DENIED. SO ORDERED. s/Laurie J. Michelson LAURIE J. MICHELSON UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE Date: July 29, 2019 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I hereby certify that a copy of the foregoing document was served upon counsel of record and/or pro se parties on this date, July 29, 2019, using the Electronic Court Filing system and/or first-class U.S. mail. s/William Barkholz Case Manager