Snyder v. Commissioner of Social Security, No. 5:2013cv02360 - Document 21 (N.D. Ohio 2014)

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. 19 ). Defendant's decision denying Plaintiff's SSI application is vacated and remanded consistent with the Report and Recommendation. Judge Benita Y. Pearson on 11/26/2014. (JLG)

Download PDF
Snyder v. Commissioner of Social Security Doc. 21 PEARSON, J. UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO EASTERN DIVISION CHARLES W. SNYDER, Plaintiff, v. COMMISSIONER OF SOCIAL SECURITY ADMINISTRATION, Defendant. ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) CASE NO. 5:13cv2360 JUDGE BENITA Y. PEARSON ORDER In the above-captioned case, an Administrative Law Judge (“ALJ”) denied Plaintiff Charles W. Snyder’s application for Supplemental Security Income (“SSI”) after a hearing. ECF No. 13 at 14–27. That decision became the final determination of Defendant Commissioner of Social Security Administration when the Appeals Council denied Plaintiff’s request to review the ALJ’s decision. Id. at 1–3. Plaintiff subsequently sought judicial review, and this Court referred the case to Magistrate Judge Kenneth S. McHargh for preparation of a Report and Recommendation pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636. The magistrate judge recommended that Defendant’s decision should be vacated and remanded for further proceedings because the ALJ’s Step 3 determination was not supported by substantial evidence. ECF No. 19. 28 U.S.C. § 636 provides that a party may serve and file specific written objections within fourteen days after being served with the recommendations of the magistrate judge. The statute does not require a district judge to review a magistrate judge’s report to which no Dockets.Justia.com (5:13cv2360) objections are filed. Thomas v. Arn, 474 U.S. 140, 149, 106 S. Ct. 466, 88 L. Ed. 2d (1986). The cutoff date to file objections was November 28, 2014. On November 25, Defendant filed a notice informing the Court that Defendant will not object to the Report and Recommendation. ECF No. 20. Plaintiff has also indicated to the Court his satisfaction with the magistrate judge’s recommendation. Any further review by this Court would be a duplicative and inefficient use of the Court’s resources. See Howard v. Secretary of Health & Human Services, 932 F.2d 505, 509 (6th Cir. 1991). Accordingly, the Court adopts the Report and Recommendation. Defendant’s decision denying Plaintiff’s SSI application is vacated and remanded consistent with the Report and Recommendation. IT IS SO ORDERED. November 26, 2014 Date /s/ Benita Y. Pearson Benita Y. Pearson United States District Judge 2

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.