Pitts v. Commissioner of Social Security

District Court, S.D. Ohio

Pitts v. Commissioner of Social Security

Trial Court Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO WESTERN DIVISION CARRIE A. PITTS, Plaintiff, Case No. 1:19-cv-1003 v. JUDGE DOUGLAS R. COLE Magistrate Judge Karen Litkovitz COMMISSIONER OF SOCIAL SECURITY, Defendant. ORDER On January 25, 202 1, Magistrate Judge Litkovitz issued a Report and Recommendation (the “R&R”) (Doc. 21) recommending that the ALJ’s decision should be AFFIRMED and that this matter be closed on the docket of the Court. The R&R advised the parties that failing to object within 14 days would constitute a forfeiture of the right to review. (R&R at #1930 (first citing Thomas v. Arn,

474 U.S. 140

(1985); then United States v. Walters,

638 F.2d 947

(6th Cir. 1981))). Now, the time period for objection has run, and no party has objected.

28 U.S.C. § 636

(b)(1)(C). “There is no indication that Congress, in enacting § 636(b)(1)(C), intended to require a district judge to review a magistrate’s report to which no objections are filed.” Thomas,

474 U.S. at 152

; see also Berskhire v. Beauvais,

928 F.3d 520

, 530–31 (6th Cir. 2019) (noting “fail[ure] to file an objection to the magistrate judge’s R&R … is forfeiture”). Thus, the Court ADOPTS Magistrate Judge Litkovitz’s R&R (Doc. 21), AFFIRMS the ALJ’s decision, and DIRECTS the Clerk to enter judgment accordingly. SO ORDERED.

February 25, 2021 DATE DOUGLAS R. COLE UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Reference

Status
Unknown