Pitts v. Commissioner of Social Security

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