UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN 

NORTHERN DIVISION 

GERALD COVELL, 

 Plaintiff, Case No. 14-cv-13033 

v. Honorable Thomas L. Ludington 

 Magistrate Judge Patricia T. Morris 

COMMISSIONER OF SOCIAL SECURITY, 

 Defendant. 

__________________________________________/ 

ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION, GRANTING 

PLAINTIFF’S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT, DENYING DEFENDANT’S 

MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT, AND REVERSING THE DECISION OF THE 

ADMINISTRATIVE LAW JUDGE AND REMANDING FOR FURTHER 

PROCEEDINGS 

 On August 4, 2014, Plaintiff Gerald Covell filed a Complaint appealing the determination 

by the Social Security Administration that he was not entitled to benefits. Compl., ECF No. 1. 

December 6, 2015, Plaintiff Covell filed a motion for summary judgment seeking a 

determination that the Administrative Law Judge (“ALJ”) who determined he was not disabled 

erred in that determination. Pl.’s Mot. Summ. J., ECF No. 15. Defendant Commissioner also 

filed a motion for summary judgment seeking affirmance of the ALJ’s determination. Def.’s 

Mot. Summ. J., ECF No. 19. All pretrial matters in this case were referred to Magistrate Judge 

Mona Majzoub for determination of all non-dispositive motions and issuance of a Report and 

Recommendation. ECF No. 3. On January 12, 2015, the case was reassigned to Magistrate Judge 

Elizabeth A. Stafford. ECF No. 17. 

On July 27, 2015, Judge Stafford issued a report recommending that Plaintiff’s motion 

for summary judgment be granted, Defendant’s motion for summary judgment be denied, and 

the Commissioner’s decision be reversed and the case remanded for further factual findings. 

Rep. & Rec. 1-2, ECF No. 21. Judge Stafford reviewed the Administrative Law Judge’s decision 

1:14-cv-13033-TLL-EAS Doc # 22 Filed 08/14/15 Pg 1 of 3 Pg ID 356
- 2 - 

to determine if it was supported by substantial evidence. Id. at 5. She found that the ALJ’s 

determination at step five of the disability framework was not supported by substantial evidence. 

Id. at 6-10. Specifically, Judge Stafford noted that “[t]he Commissioner had the burden to 

demonstrate that Covell had transferable skills” but “[t]hat burden has not been satisfied because 

the [Vocational Expert]’s analysis of Covell’s transferable skills is premised on a made-up job 

classification.” Id. at 7. 

Although the Magistrate Judge’s report explicitly stated that the parties to this action may 

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. 21, is ADOPTED. 

 It is further ORDERED that Plaintiff’s Motion for Summary Judgment, ECF No. 15, is 

GRANTED. 

 It is further ORDERED that Defendant’s Motion for Summary Judgment, ECF No. 19, is 

DENIED. 

 It is further ORDERED that the decision of the Administrative Law Judge is 

REVERSED and REMANDED for proceedings consistent with the Report and 

Recommendation. 

s/Thomas L. Ludington 

 THOMAS L. LUDINGTON 

 United States District Judge 

Dated: August 14, 2015 

1:14-cv-13033-TLL-EAS Doc # 22 Filed 08/14/15 Pg 2 of 3 Pg ID 357
- 3 - 

 

PROOF OF SERVICE 

The undersigned certifies that a copy of the foregoing order was served 

upon each attorney or party of record herein by electronic means or first 

class U.S. mail on August 14, 2015. 

 s/ Karri Sandusky 

 Karri Sandusky, Acting Case Manager 

1:14-cv-13033-TLL-EAS Doc # 22 Filed 08/14/15 Pg 3 of 3 Pg ID 358