Haverhals v. Commissioner of Social Security

Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN SOUTHERN DIVISION

ERIC HAVERHALS, ) Plaintiff, ) ) No. 1:25-cv-75 -v- ) ) Honorable Paul L. Maloney COMMISSIONER OF SOCIAL SECURITY, ) Defendant. ) )

ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION

Plaintiff Eric Haverhals filed this complaint seeking judicial review of the denial of his application for Supplemental Security Income. The Magistrate Judge issued a report recommending the court affirm the Commissioner’s decision (ECF No. 16). Plaintiff filed objections (ECF No. 17). After being served with a report and recommendation (R&R) issued by a magistrate judge, a party has fourteen days to file written objections to the proposed findings and recommendations. 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1); Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b)(2). A district court judge reviews de novo the portions of the R&R to which objections have been filed. 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1); Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b)(3). Only those objections that are specific are entitled to a de novo review under the statute. , 806 F.2d 636, 637 (6th Cir. 1986) (per curiam). Plaintiff has not advanced a proper objection to the report and recommendation. Relying on the arguments advanced in the previously filed briefs, Plaintiff simply disagrees with the Magistrate Judge’s application of the law to the facts. Plaintiff has not identified any error of law in the R&R. Nor has Plaintiff identified any factual error in the R&R that would require a different outcome. Accordingly, the Court ADOPTS the report and recommendation (ECF No. 16). IT

IS SO ORDERED. Date: August 15, 2025 /s/ Paul L. Maloney Paul L. Maloney United States District Judge