COSTON v. COMMISSIONER OF SOCIAL SECURITY

Case No. 16-10232.

KYLAN COSTON, Plaintiff, v. COMMISSIONER OF SOCIAL SECURITY, Defendant.

United States District Court, E.D. Michigan, Northern Division.

Editors Note
Applicable Law: 42 U.S.C. § 416
Cause: 42 U.S.C. § 416 Denial of Social Security Benefits
Nature of Suit: 864 Social Security: SSID Tit. XVI
Source: PACER


Attorney(s) appearing for the Case

Kylan Coston, Plaintiff, represented by Joshua L. Moore , Detroit Legal Services.

Commissioner of Social Security, Defendant, represented by Gwendolyn Russell , Office of the General Counsel & Vanessa Miree Mays , U.S. Attorney's Office.


ORDER ADOPTING THE REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION, DENYING PLAINTIFF'S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT, GRANTING DEFENDANT'S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT, AND AFFIRMING THE DECISION OF THE COMMISSIONER

THOMAS L. LUDINGTON, District Judge.

Plaintiff Kylan Coston filed an application for Disability Insurance Benefits and Supplemental Security Income on July 26, 2013, alleging a disability onset date of January 1, 2008. After his claim was initially denied Plaintiff timely requested an administrative hearing, which was held on April 21, 2015. On June 19, 2015 the ALJ issued a written decision finding that Plaintiff was not disabled under the Social Security Act. That decision became final when the Appeals Council denied Plaintiff's request for review. Plaintiff then appealed to this Court on January 24, 2016. See Compl., ECF No. 1.

Plaintiff Coston filed a motion for summary judgment on April 28, 2016. ECF No. 14. Defendant Commissioner then filed a motion for summary judgment on July 5, 2016. ECF No. 16. On January 20, 2017 Magistrate Judge Patricia T. Morris issued a report and recommendation, finding that the ALJ's determination that Coston was not disabled was supported by substantial evidence. ECF No. 17. In so concluding, the magistrate judge agreed with the ALJ's finding that Plaintiff did not have a condition that met or equaled Listings 11.02 or 11.03. The magistrate judge therefore recommended that Plaintiff's motion for summary judgment be denied, Defendant Commissioner's motion for summary judgment be granted, and the decision of the ALJ be affirmed.

Although the magistrate judge's report explicitly stated that the parties to this action could object to and seek review of the recommendation within fourteen days of service of the report, neither Plaintiff nor Defendant filed any objections. The election not to file objections to the magistrate judge's report releases the Court from its duty to independently review the record. Thomas v. Arn, 474 U.S. 140, 149 (1985). The failure to file objections to the report and recommendation waives any further right to appeal.

Accordingly, it is ORDERED that the magistrate judge's report and recommendation, ECF No. 17, is ADOPTED.

It is further ORDERED that Plaintiff Coston's motion for summary judgment, ECF No. 14, is DENIED.

It is further ORDERED that Defendant Commissioner's motion for summary judgment, ECF No. 16, is GRANTED.

It is further ORDERED that the Commissioner's decision is AFFIRMED.


Comment

1000 Characters Remaining

Leagle.com reserves the right to edit or remove comments but is under no obligation to do so, or to explain individual moderation decisions.

User Comments

Listed below are the cases that are cited in this Featured Case. Click the citation to see the full text of the cited case. Citations are also linked in the body of the Featured Case.

Cited Cases

  • No Cases Found

Listed below are those cases in which this Featured Case is cited. Click on the case name to see the full text of the citing case.

Citing Cases