GARCIA v. ASTRUE, CV 10-8427-DSF (DTB). (2012)
Court: District Court, C.D. California
Number: infdco20120601e15
Visitors: 9
Filed: May 21, 2012
Latest Update: May 21, 2012
Summary: ORDER ACCEPTING FINDINGS, CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS OF UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE DALE S. FISCHER, District Judge. Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 636, the Court has reviewed the Complaint, all the records and files herein, and the Report and Recommendation of the United States Magistrate Judge. Objections to the Report and Recommendation ("Objections") have been filed herein. Having made a de novo determination of those portions of the Report and Recommendation to which objections have be
Summary: ORDER ACCEPTING FINDINGS, CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS OF UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE DALE S. FISCHER, District Judge. Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 636, the Court has reviewed the Complaint, all the records and files herein, and the Report and Recommendation of the United States Magistrate Judge. Objections to the Report and Recommendation ("Objections") have been filed herein. Having made a de novo determination of those portions of the Report and Recommendation to which objections have bee..
More
ORDER ACCEPTING FINDINGS, CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS OF UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
DALE S. FISCHER, District Judge.
Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636, the Court has reviewed the Complaint, all the records and files herein, and the Report and Recommendation of the United States Magistrate Judge. Objections to the Report and Recommendation ("Objections") have been filed herein. Having made a de novo determination of those portions of the Report and Recommendation to which objections have been made, the Court concurs with and accepts the findings, conclusions and recommendations of the Magistrate Judge. In particular, the Court finds that the Commissioner's objections involve findings that the ALJ did not rely upon in finding medical improvement and evaluating plaintiff's credibility. (See Objections at 6, 8-9.) The Court is constrained to review the reasons the ALJ asserts and may not affirm the ALJ's decision on a ground upon which he did not rely. See Orn v. Astrue, 495 F.3d 625, 630 (9th Cir. 2007); Connett v. Barnhart, 340 F.3d 871, 874 (9th Cir. 2003).
IT THEREFORE IS ORDERED that: (1) Judgment be entered reversing the decision of the Commissioner of Social Security, and remanding this matter for further administrative proceedings consistent with the Report and Recommendation; and (2) plaintiff's pending Motion of Objections to Magistrate's Order to Deny Ex Parte Application to Add an Attachment is hereby DENIED as moot.
Source: Leagle
