Hutchinson v. Commissioner Social Security Administration, No. 1:2016cv00038 - Document 23 (N.D. Ohio 2016)

Court Description: Memorandum of Opinion and Order For the reasons set forth herein, the Court adopts the Magistrate Judge's Report and Recommendation, ECF No. 21 . The Court will vacate the decision of the Commissioner of Social Security and remand this case to the Commissioner for rehearing and a new decision. Judge Benita Y. Pearson on 12/21/2016. (JLG)
Download PDF
Hutchinson v. Commissioner Social Security Administration Doc. 23 PEARSON, J. UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO EASTERN DIVISION CHARLOTTE HUTCHINSON, on behalf of T.H. Plaintiff, v. COMMISSIONER OF SOCIAL SECURITY ADMINISTRATION, Defendant. ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) CASE NO. 1:16CV38 JUDGE BENITA Y. PEARSON MEMORANDUM OF OPINION AND ORDER An Administrative Law Judge (“ALJ”) denied Plaintiff Charlotte Hutchinson’s application for Supplemental Security Income, made on behalf of her grandson, T.H., after a hearing in the above-captioned case. That decision became the final determination of the Commissioner of Social Security when the Appeals Council denied the request to review the ALJ’s decision. The claimant sought judicial review of the Commissioner’s decision, and this Court referred the case to Magistrate Judge Thomas M. Parker for preparation of a Report and Recommendation pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636 and Local Rule 72.2(b)(1). The Magistrate Judge submitted a Report (ECF No. 21), recommending that the Court vacate the Commissioner’s decision and remand the case to the ALJ for evaluation of T.H.’s treating physician’s opinion and analysis of T.H’s domains of functioning. ECF No. 21 at PageID #: 470–84). Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b)(2) provides that objections to a report and recommendation must be filed within 14 days after service. On December 5, 2016, the Commissioner filed a Response to Dockets.Justia.com (1:16CV38) the Report and Recommended Decision (ECF No. 22), which states that the Commissioner will not be filing objections. Furthermore, Plaintiff has not filed any objections, evidencing satisfaction with the Magistrate Judge’s recommendations. Any further review by this Court would be a duplicative and inefficient use of the Court’s limited resources. Thomas v. Arn, 728 F.2d 813 (6th Cir. 1984), aff’d, 474 U.S. 140 (1985); Howard v. Secretary of Health and Human Services, 932 F.2d 505 (6th Cir. 1991); United States v. Walters, 638 F.2d 947, 949-50 (6th Cir. 1981). Accordingly, the Court adopts the Magistrate Judge’s Report and Recommendation. The Court will vacate the decision of the Commissioner of Social Security and remand this case to the Commissioner for rehearing and a new decision. IT IS SO ORDERED. December 21, 2016 Date /s/ Benita Y. Pearson Benita Y. Pearson United States District Judge 2