Krueger v. Social Security, Commissioner of, No. 4:2015cv10393 - Document 14 (E.D. Mich. 2015)

Court Description: OPINION and ORDER (1) Adopting Magistrate Judge's 13 Report and Recommendation; (2) Granting In Part and Denying In Part Plaintiff's 11 Motion for Summary Judgment; (3)Denying Defendant's 12 Motion for Summary Judgment; and (4) Remanding This Matter to the Commissioner of Social Security. Signed by District Judge Linda V. Parker. (RLou)

Download PDF
Krueger v. Social Security, Commissioner of Doc. 14 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN SOUTHERN DIVISION KARRY BETH KRUEGER, Plaintiff, Civil Case No. 15-10393 Honorable Linda V. Parker v. COMMISSIONER OF SOCIAL SECURITY, Defendant. _____________________________/ OPINION AND ORDER (1) ADOPTING MAGISTRATE JUDGE’S OCTOBER 19, 2015 REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION; (2) GRANTING IN PART AND DENYING IN PART PLAINTIFF’S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT; (3) DENYING DEFENDANT’S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT; AND (4) REMANDING THIS MATTER TO THE COMMISSIONER OF SOCIAL SECURITY On January 29, 2015, Plaintiff filed this lawsuit challenging Defendant’s final decision denying her application for Disability Insurance Benefits under the Social Security Act. On the same date, the matter was referred to Magistrate Judge David R. Grand for all pretrial proceedings, including a hearing and determination of all non-dispositive matters pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(A) and/or a report and recommendation (“R&R”) on all dispositive matters pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B). (ECF No. 3.) The parties subsequently filed cross-motions for summary judgment. (ECF Nos. 11, 12.) Dockets.Justia.com On October 19, 2015, Magistrate Judge Grand issued his R&R in which he recommends that this Court grant Plaintiff’s motion to the extent she seeks remand and deny the motion to the extent she seeks an award of benefits. (ECF No. 13.) Magistrate Judge Grant recommends that the matter be remanded to the Administrative Law Judge for further proceedings pursuant to sentence four of 42 U.S.C. § 405(g). (Id.) Magistrate Judge Grand finds that substantial evidence does not support the ALJ’s finding that Plaintiff is not credible. At the end of his R&R, Magistrate Judge Grand advises the parties that they may object to and seek review of the R&R within fourteen days of service upon them. (Id. at 24) He further specifically advises the parties that “[f]ailure to file specific objections constitutes a waiver of any further right to appeal.” (Id.) Neither party filed objections to the R&R. This Court has carefully reviewed the R&R and concurs with the conclusions reached by Magistrate Judge Grand. The Court therefore adopts the magistrate judge’s October 19, 2015 Report and Recommendation. Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED, that Plaintiff’s motion for summary judgment (ECF No. 11) is GRANTED IN PART AND DENIED IN PART; IT IS FURTHER ORDERED, that Defendant’s motion for summary judgment (ECF No. 12) is DENIED; 2 IT IS FURTHER ORDERED, that this matter is REMANDED pursuant to sentence four of 42 U.S.C. § 405(g) for further proceedings consistent with Magistrate Judge Grand’s October 19, 2015 R&R. s/ Linda V. Parker LINDA V. PARKER U.S. DISTRICT JUDGE Dated: December 18, 2015 I hereby certify that a copy of the foregoing document was mailed to counsel of record and/or pro se parties on this date, December 18, 2015, by electronic and/or U.S. First Class mail. s/ Richard Loury Case Manager 3

Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.