BLACK v. COLVIN, 2:13-cv-1258-LDG-VCF. (2015)
Court: District Court, D. Nevada
Number: infdco20151016d45
Visitors: 8
Filed: Oct. 14, 2015
Latest Update: Oct. 14, 2015
Summary: ORDER LLOYD D. GEORGE , District Judge . Before the court is the magistrate judge's report and recommendation that plaintiff's motion for reversal (#14) be denied, and defendant's cross-motion to affirm (#15) be granted. Plaintiff has not filed objections to the report and recommendation. The court has reviewed the report and recommendation and concludes that the magistrate judge's analysis is sound. Furthermore, in the absence of any objection to the report and recommendation, the court ne
Summary: ORDER LLOYD D. GEORGE , District Judge . Before the court is the magistrate judge's report and recommendation that plaintiff's motion for reversal (#14) be denied, and defendant's cross-motion to affirm (#15) be granted. Plaintiff has not filed objections to the report and recommendation. The court has reviewed the report and recommendation and concludes that the magistrate judge's analysis is sound. Furthermore, in the absence of any objection to the report and recommendation, the court nee..
More
ORDER
LLOYD D. GEORGE, District Judge.
Before the court is the magistrate judge's report and recommendation that plaintiff's motion for reversal (#14) be denied, and defendant's cross-motion to affirm (#15) be granted. Plaintiff has not filed objections to the report and recommendation. The court has reviewed the report and recommendation and concludes that the magistrate judge's analysis is sound. Furthermore, in the absence of any objection to the report and recommendation, the court need not review de novo any factual determination made by the magistrate judge. See 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(c). Therefore,
THE COURT HEREBY ORDERS that the report and recommendation (#17) is ADOPTED.
THE COURT FURTHER ORDERS that plaintiff's motion for reversal (#14) is DENIED, and that defendant's cross-motion to affirm (#15) is GRANTED.
Source: Leagle
