UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN

SOUTHERN DIVISION

TRACY L. CHILDRESS,

Plaintiff, CASE NO: 14-12399

HONORABLE VICTORIA A. ROBERTS

v.

COMMISSIONER OF SOCIAL SECURITY,

Defendant.

 /

ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION (Doc. #14)

GRANTING DEFENDANT’S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT (Doc. # 12) 

AND DENYING PLAINTIFF’S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT (Doc. # 11)

Plaintiff Tracy L. Childress (“Childress”) brings this action pursuant to 42 U.S.C.

405(g) to appeal the denial of Social Security disability benefits made by the

Commissioner of Social Security (the “Commissioner”). The Appeals Council denied

Childress’s Request for Review of the second decision issued by the Administrative Law

Judge (“ALJ”) on April 12, 2013. That ALJ decision stands as the Commissioner’s final

decision. This matter is before the Court on the parties’ cross-motions for summary

judgment. The Court referred those motions to Magistrate Judge Anthony P. Patti. 

Magistrate Judge Patti issued a Report and Recommendation (“R&R”)

recommending that the Court grant Defendant’s Motion for Summary Judgment and

deny Childress’s. Magistrate Judge Patti found that: (1) the ALJ’s assessment of

Childress’s credibility as non-persuasive -- in light of Childress’s representations, the

medical records, her activities of daily living, and her work history since the alleged

onset date -- is supported by substantial evidence; (2) the ALJ gave proper weight to

1

2:14-cv-12399-VAR-APP Doc # 17 Filed 09/30/15 Pg 1 of 3 Pg ID 945
and good reasons for the opinions and assessments of Childress’s treating medical

sources, including those of Dr. Kurz; and (3) the RFC analysis as well as the Step 5

determination were supported by substantial evidence. 

Childress filed objections to the R&R relating to: (1) the assessment of her

credibility; and (2) the weight given to Dr. Kurz’s opinions. The Commissioner

responded to the objections.

After proper objections are made, the Court reviews de novo a Magistrate

Judge’s Report and Recommendation on a dispositive motion. 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1); F.

R. Civ. P. 72(b)(3). A court may accept, reject, or modify, in whole or in part, the findings

or recommendations made by the magistrate judge. Id. A district court need not conduct

de novo review where the objections are "[f]rivolous, conclusive or general." Mira v.

Marshall, 806 F.2d 636, 637 (6th Cir.1986) (citation omitted); see also Rice v. Comm'r of

Soc. Sec., 169 F. App'x 452, 453-54 (6th Cir. 2006) ("issues adverted to in a perfunctory

manner, unaccompanied by some effort at developed argumentation, are deemed

waived.") (quoting McPherson v. Kelsey, 125 F.3d 989, 995-96 (6th Cir.1997)). After

completing a de novo review, there is no requirement that the district court articulate all

of the reasons it rejects a party's objections. Tuggle v. Seabold, 806 F.2d 87, 93 (6th

Cir. 1986); Dickey-Williams v. Comm'r of Soc. Sec., 975 F. Supp. 2d 792, 798 (E.D.

Mich. 2013). 

After carefully reviewing the cross motions for summary judgment, the R&R,

Childress’s objections, the Commissioner’s Response, and the remainder of the record,

the Court agrees with Magistrate Judge Patti’s conclusions. 

Magistrate Judge Patti accurately laid out the facts and relevant portions of the

2

2:14-cv-12399-VAR-APP Doc # 17 Filed 09/30/15 Pg 2 of 3 Pg ID 946
administrative record; he engaged in a thorough analysis of the issues and provided

reasoned explanations for his conclusions. In reaching his conclusions, Magistrate

Judge Patti considered the entire record and applied the appropriate standard for review

of an ALJ’s decision. 

Accordingly, the Court ADOPTS Magistrate Judge Patti’s Report and

Recommendation: Defendant’s Motion for Summary Judgment is GRANTED; Plaintiff’s

Motion for Summary Judgment is DENIED. The decision of the Commissioner of Social

Security is AFFIRMED. 

IT IS ORDERED. 

S/Victoria A. Roberts 

Victoria A. Roberts

United States District Judge

Dated: September 30, 2015

The undersigned certifies that a copy of this

document was served on the attorneys of

record by electronic means or U.S. Mail on

September 30, 2015.

s/Linda Vertriest 

Deputy Clerk

3

2:14-cv-12399-VAR-APP Doc # 17 Filed 09/30/15 Pg 3 of 3 Pg ID 947