Muehlfeld v. Commissioner of Social Security Administration

N.D. Ohio

Muehlfeld v. Commissioner of Social Security Administration

DecidedJune 6, 2023

Docket3:23-cv-00225

StatusUnknown

This text of Muehlfeld v. Commissioner of Social Security Administration (Muehlfeld v. Commissioner of Social Security Administration) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court, N.D. Ohio primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Muehlfeld v. Commissioner of Social Security Administration, (N.D. Ohio 2023).

Pincite

Opinion

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

Cecelia R. Muehlfeld, Case No. 3:23-cv-225

Plaintiff,

v. ORDER

Commissioner of Social Security Administration,

Defendant.

Before me is the Report and Recommendation (“R & R”) of Magistrate Judge Darrell A. Clay filed on February 14, 2023, recommending I deny Plaintiff’s motions to proceed in forma pauperis in this action. (Doc. No. 8). Under the relevant statute: Within [fourteen (14)] days after being served a copy of these proposed Findings and Recommendation, any party who wishes to object must file and serve written objections or further appeal is waived.

United States v. Campbell, 261 F.3d 628, 631-32 (6th Cir. 2001) (citation omitted); see also 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1) (effective Dec. 1, 2009); Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b)(2). In this case, the fourteen-day window for objections has elapsed, and no objections have been filed. Following review of Judge Clay’s R & R, I adopt its legal conclusion as the Order of this Court. I find Judge Clay’s analysis sound and agree that paying the filing fee in this case would not impose undue hardship on Plaintiff. Therefore, I deny Plaintiff’s motions to proceed in forma pauperis. (Doc. Nos. 2 and 7). But rather than the fourteen days recommended by Judge Clay, I order Plaintiff to pay the full filing fee of $402 within thirty (30) days of this Order. If Plaintiff fails to do so, this case will be dismissed.

So Ordered. s/ Jeffrey J. Helmick United States District Judge

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

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

Cecelia R. Muehlfeld, Case No. 3:23-cv-225

Plaintiff,

v. ORDER

Commissioner of Social Security Administration,

Defendant.

Before me is the Report and Recommendation (“R & R”) of Magistrate Judge Darrell A. Clay filed on February 14, 2023, recommending I deny Plaintiff’s motions to proceed in forma pauperis in this action. (Doc. No. 8). Under the relevant statute: Within [fourteen (14)] days after being served a copy of these proposed Findings and Recommendation, any party who wishes to object must file and serve written objections or further appeal is waived.

United States v. Campbell, 261 F.3d 628, 631-32 (6th Cir. 2001) (citation omitted); see also 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1) (effective Dec. 1, 2009); Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b)(2). In this case, the fourteen-day window for objections has elapsed, and no objections have been filed. Following review of Judge Clay’s R & R, I adopt its legal conclusion as the Order of this Court. I find Judge Clay’s analysis sound and agree that paying the filing fee in this case would not impose undue hardship on Plaintiff. Therefore, I deny Plaintiff’s motions to proceed in forma pauperis. (Doc. Nos. 2 and 7). But rather than the fourteen days recommended by Judge Clay, I order Plaintiff to pay the full filing fee of $402 within thirty (30) days of this Order. If Plaintiff fails to do so, this case will be dismissed.

So Ordered. s/ Jeffrey J. Helmick United States District Judge

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

Muehlfeld v. Commissioner of Social Security Administration, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/muehlfeld-v-commissioner-of-social-security-administration-ohnd-2023.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack