Filed: Jan. 31, 2019
Latest Update: Jan. 31, 2019
Summary: ORDER: (1) ADOPTING THE REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION (Doc. No. 21); (2) GRANTING DEFENDANT'S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT (Doc. No. 14); and (3) DENYING PLAINTIFF'S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT ANTHONY J. BATTAGLIA , District Judge . Before the Court are cross-motions for summary judgment on Plaintiff's request that the Court review the commissioner's denial of her claim for social security benefits. (Doc. No. 1.) The Court referred the matter to Magistrate Judge Karen S. Crawford for a Report
Summary: ORDER: (1) ADOPTING THE REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION (Doc. No. 21); (2) GRANTING DEFENDANT'S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT (Doc. No. 14); and (3) DENYING PLAINTIFF'S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT ANTHONY J. BATTAGLIA , District Judge . Before the Court are cross-motions for summary judgment on Plaintiff's request that the Court review the commissioner's denial of her claim for social security benefits. (Doc. No. 1.) The Court referred the matter to Magistrate Judge Karen S. Crawford for a Report a..
More
ORDER: (1) ADOPTING THE REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION (Doc. No. 21);
(2) GRANTING DEFENDANT'S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT (Doc. No. 14); and (3) DENYING PLAINTIFF'S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT
ANTHONY J. BATTAGLIA, District Judge.
Before the Court are cross-motions for summary judgment on Plaintiff's request that the Court review the commissioner's denial of her claim for social security benefits. (Doc. No. 1.) The Court referred the matter to Magistrate Judge Karen S. Crawford for a Report and Recommendation ("R&R"). (Doc. No. 18.) The R&R recommends (1) granting defendant's motion for summary judgment, (Doc. No. 14), and (2) denying plaintiff's motion, (Doc. No. 17). The parties were instructed to file written objections to the R&R within fourteen days of being served with a copy of the R&R. (Id. at 21.)
Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 72(b) and 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1) set forth a district judge's duties in connection with a magistrate judge's R&R. The district judge must "make a de novo determination of those portions of the report . . . to which objection is made[,]" and "may accept, reject, or modify, in whole or in part, the findings or recommendations made by the magistrate judge." 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1); see also United States v. Remsing, 874 F.2d 614, 617 (9th Cir. 1989). However, in the absence of objection(s), the Court "need only satisfy itself that there is no clear error on the face of the record in order to accept the recommendation." Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b) advisory committee note to the 1983 amendment; see also United States v. Reyna-Tapia, 328 F.3d 1114, 1121 (9th Cir. 2003).
Neither party has filed objections to Magistrate Judge Crawford's R&R. Having reviewed the R&R, the Court finds it thorough, well-reasoned, and contains no clear error. Accordingly, the Court hereby: (1) ADOPTS Magistrate Judge Crawford's R&R, (Doc. No. 21); (2) GRANTS Defendant's summary judgment motion, (Doc. No. 14); and (3) DENIES Plaintiff's summary judgment motion, (Doc. No. 17). The Court Clerk is instructed to close the case.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
