Lamb v. Commissioner of Social Security, No. 5:2013cv02232 - Document 20 (N.D. Ohio 2014)
Court Description: Memorandum, Opinion and Order Adopting the Report and Recommendation re 17 of the Magistrate Judge. The Commissioner's decision is affirmed. Judge John R. Adams on 9/2/14. (K,C)
Download PDF
<![CDATA[
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO EASTERN DIVISION NANCY LAMB, Plaintiff, -vsCOMMISSIONER OF SOCIAL SECURITY Defendant. ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) CASE NO. 5:13-cv-02232-JRA JUDGE JOHN R. ADAMS MEMORANDUM OF OPINION AND ORDER The Social Security Administration denied Plaintiff’s application for supplemental security income under Title XVI of the Social Security Act (42 U.S.C. § 1381 et seq.) in the above-captioned case. Plaintiff sought judicial review of the Commissioner’s decision, and this Court referred the case to Magistrate Judge Nancy A. Vecchiarelli for preparation of a report and recommendation pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636 and Local Rules 72.2(b)(1). The Magistrate Judge submitted a report and recommendation (Doc. 17) recommending that the Court affirm the Commissioner’s decision. Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b) provides that the parties may object to a report and recommendation within ten (10) days after service. Plaintiff filed a Notice (Doc. 19) advising the Court that she would not be filing objections to the Magistrate’s report and recommendation; and to date, no objections have been filed. 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); Howard v. Sec’y of Health and Human Servs., 932 F.2d 505 (6th Cir. 1991); United States v. Walters, 638 F.2d 947, 949-50 (6th Cir. 1981). Accordingly, the report and recommendation of the Magistrate Judge is hereby adopted. The Commissioner’s decision denying Plaintiff benefits is affirmed. IT IS SO ORDERED. Dated: September 2, 2014 /s/ John R. Adams_______________ UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
]]>
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.
