Parker v. Commissioner of Social Security, No. 5:2016cv00278 - Document 39 (N.D. Ohio 2017)

Court Description: Opinion & Order signed by Judge James S. Gwin on 7/3/17. The Court adopts in whole the Report and Recommendation of the Magistrate Judge and incorporates fully herein by reference and dismisses plaintiff's complaint. (Related Docs. 1 and 36 ) (D,MA)
Download PDF
Parker v. Commissioner of Social Security Doc. 39 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO -----------------------------------------------------DEBORAH A. PARKER, Plaintiff, vs. COMMISSIONER SOCIAL SECURITY, Defendant. : : : : : : : : : : : CASE NO. 5:16-CV-278 OPINION & ORDER [Resolving Doc. 1] -----------------------------------------------------JAMES S. GWIN, UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE: On February 5, 2016, Plaintiff Deborah A. Parker filed a complaint seeking judicial review of the Defendant Commissioner of Social Security’s decision to deny her non-disability retirement income benefits.1 The Court referred the matter to Magistrate Judge William H. Baughman, Jr. On May 5, 2017, Magistrate Judge Baughman issued a Report and Recommendation (“R&R”) recommending that this Court affirm the Commissioner’s decision.2 Magistrate Judge Baughman found that because Plaintiff Parker never submitted a brief in support of her claim despite multiple extensions, an “obvious error” standard applies to her case.3 Magistrate Judge Baughman found no obvious error in the denial of benefits.4 On May 26, 2017, Plaintiff Parker requested an extension to file objections to the R&R so that she could hire a lawyer.5 The Court granted the extension.6 1 Doc. 1. Doc. 36. 3 Id. at 6. 4 Id. at 7-8. 5 Doc. 37. 6 Doc. 38. 2 Dockets.Justia.com Case No. 5:16-CV-278 Gwin, J. Objections were due June 30, 2017. Plaintiff Parker neither retained counsel nor filed objections. The Federal Magistrates Act requires a district court to conduct a de novo review only of those portions of a Report and Recommendation to which the parties have made an objection.7 Failure to timely object waives a party’s right to appeal the magistrate’s report. 8 Absent objection, a district court may adopt the magistrate judge’s report without review.9 Moreover, having conducted its own review of the complaint and record, the Court agrees with the conclusions in the Report and Recommendation. Accordingly, the Court ADOPTS in whole Magistrate Judge Baughman’s Report and Recommendation and incorporates it fully herein by reference, and DISMISSES Plaintiff Parker’s complaint. IT IS SO ORDERED. Dated: July 3, 2017 s/ James S. Gwin JAMES S. GWIN UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 7 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C). Thomas v. Arn, 474 U.S. 140, 145 (1985); United States v. Walters, 638 F.2d 947, 949-50 (6th Cir. 1981). 9 See Thomas, 474 U.S. at 149. 8 -2-