UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN 

SOUTHERN DIVISION 

CAROL ANN RIGGS, 

 

Plaintiff, 

 Civil Case No. 15-10031 

v. Honorable Linda V. Parker 

COMMISSIONER OF SOCIAL 

SECURITY, 

Defendant. 

_____________________________/ 

OPINION AND ORDER (1) ADOPTING MAGISTRATE JUDGE’S 

SEPTEMBER 29, 2015 REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION [ECF NO. 

13]; (2) DENYING PLAINTIFF’S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT 

(ECF No. 11]; AND (3) GRANTING DEFENDANT’S MOTION FOR 

SUMMARY JUDGMENT [ECF NO. 12]

On January 6, 2015, Plaintiff filed this lawsuit challenging Defendant’s final 

decision denying her application for disability, disability insurance benefits, and 

supplemental security income under the Social Security Act. On January 7, 2015, 

the matter was referred to Magistrate Judge Patricia T. Morris for all pretrial 

proceedings, including a hearing and determination of all non-dispositive matters 

pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(A) and/or a report and recommendation 

(“R&R”) on all dispositive matters pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B). (ECF No. 

5.) The parties subsequently filed cross-motions for summary judgment. (ECF 

Nos. 11, 12.) 

4:15-cv-10031-LVP-PTM Doc # 14 Filed 12/18/15 Pg 1 of 3 Pg ID 526
2

On September 29, 2015, Magistrate Judge Morris issued her R&R in which 

she recommends that this Court deny Plaintiff’s motion, grant Defendant’s motion, 

and affirm Defendant’s decision finding Plaintiff not disabled under the Social 

Security Act. (ECF No. 13.) In the R&R, Magistrate Judge Morris concludes that 

the ALJ properly considered the medical evidence and Plaintiff’s asserted 

limitations and that substantial evidence supported the ALJ’s decision. Magistrate 

Judge Morris found a “dearth of evidence” supporting Plaintiff’s claimed neck 

ailments which Plaintiff faulted the ALJ for not considering. (Id. at 25.) 

Magistrate Judge Morris therefore recommends that the Court affirm Defendant’s 

decision. 

At the end of the R&R, Magistrate Judge Morris advises the parties that they 

may object to and seek review of the R&R within fourteen days of service upon 

them. (Id. at 26-27.) She further specifically advises the parties that “[f]ailure to 

file specific objections constitutes a waiver of any further right to appeal.” (Id.) 

Neither party filed objections to the R&R. 

This Court has carefully reviewed the R&R and concurs with the 

conclusions reached by Magistrate Judge Morris. The Court therefore adopts the 

magistrate judge’s September 29, 2015 Report and Recommendation and is 

affirming Defendant’s decision denying Plaintiff social security benefits. 

Accordingly, 

4:15-cv-10031-LVP-PTM Doc # 14 Filed 12/18/15 Pg 2 of 3 Pg ID 527
3

IT IS ORDERED, that Plaintiff’s motion for summary judgment (ECF No. 

11) is DENIED; 

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED, that Defendant’s motion for summary 

judgment (ECF No. 12) is GRANTED. 

 s/ Linda V. Parker 

 LINDA V. PARKER 

 U.S. DISTRICT JUDGE 

Dated: December 18, 2015 

I hereby certify that a copy of the foregoing document was mailed to counsel of 

record and/or pro se parties on this date, December 18, 2015, by electronic and/or 

U.S. First Class mail. 

 s/ Richard Loury 

 Case Manager 

4:15-cv-10031-LVP-PTM Doc # 14 Filed 12/18/15 Pg 3 of 3 Pg ID 528