Janney v. Comm'r of Soc. Sec.

Full title: Julia Janney, Plaintiff v. Commissioner of Social Security, Defendant

Court: UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO WESTERN DIVISION

Date published: Mar 19, 2014

Case No. 3:13CV399 (N.D. Ohio Mar. 19, 2014)

Opinion

Case No. 3:13CV399

03-19-2014

Julia Janney, Plaintiff v. Commissioner of Social Security, Defendant

James G. Carr

ORDER

In this appeal, I review defendant Commissioner of Social Security's (Commissioner) decision denying Julia Janney's claim for disability insurance benefits and supplemental security income under Titles II and XVI of the Social Security Act, 42 U.S.C. §§ 416(I), 423, 1381 et seq. Magistrate Judge Kathleen B. Burke reviewed the decision and recommends that I affirm the final decision of the Commissioner and dismiss Janney's claim. (Doc. 18).

Plaintiff has filed a document titled "Plaintiff's Objections to Magistrate [sic] Report and Recommendation" (Doc. 19) in which she copied and pasted verbatim her arguments from her brief on the merits. (Doc. 15).

Plaintiff's pleading does not satisfy the requirements for an objection. Under 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(c) and Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b), a party must file "specific written objections" to trigger de novo review by the district court. The Supreme Court explained the purpose of this requirement, stating "[t]he filing of objections to a magistrate's report enables the district judge to focus attention on those issues - factual and legal - that are at the heart of the parties' dispute." Thomas v. Arn, 474 U.S. 140, 147 (1985).

The Sixth Circuit has noted that "objections must be clear enough to enable the district court to discern those issues that are dispositive and contentious." Miller v. Curie, 50 F.3d 373, 380 (6th Cir. 1995). A party's failure to file specific objections is a waiver of those objections. Cowherd v. Million, 380 F.3d 909, 912 (6th Cir. 2004). Thus,"parties who fail to make specific objections do so at their own peril." Id.

Because plaintiff raises no specific objections to the Magistrate Judge's Report and Recommendation but merely repeats her brief word for word, I find that plaintiff has waived those objections. See Hawkins v. Astrue, 2010 WL3221855, *1 (W.D. Ky.) (dismissing plaintiff's objections to magistrate's report and recommendation because she simply copied and pasted the contents of her brief). I also find that the Magistrate Judge's Report and Recommendation is thorough, well-reasoned, and correct.

For the foregoing reasons, it is hereby:

ORDERED THAT

1. Plaintiff's objections to the Magistrate Judge's Report and Recommendation (Doc. 19) be, and the same hereby are overruled; and
2. The Report and Recommendation (Doc. 18) be, and the same hereby is adopted as the order of this court.

So ordered.

James G. Carr

Sr. United States District Judge