Kimberly M. v. Commissioner, Social Security Administration, 6:18-cv-01469-SU. (2019)
Court: District Court, D. Oregon
Number: infdco20191114b73
Visitors: 1
Filed: Nov. 11, 2019
Latest Update: Nov. 11, 2019
Summary: ORDER MARCO A. HERN NDEZ , District Judge . Magistrate Judge Patricia Sullivan issued a Findings and Recommendation on August 21, 2019, in which she recommends that the Court reverse and remand the decision of the Commissioner. The matter is now before this Court pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 636(b)(1) and Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 72(b). Defendant timely filed objections to the Findings and Recommendation. When a party objects to any portion of the Magistrate Judge's Findings and Recommen
Summary: ORDER MARCO A. HERN NDEZ , District Judge . Magistrate Judge Patricia Sullivan issued a Findings and Recommendation on August 21, 2019, in which she recommends that the Court reverse and remand the decision of the Commissioner. The matter is now before this Court pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 636(b)(1) and Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 72(b). Defendant timely filed objections to the Findings and Recommendation. When a party objects to any portion of the Magistrate Judge's Findings and Recommend..
More
ORDER
MARCO A. HERNÁNDEZ, District Judge.
Magistrate Judge Patricia Sullivan issued a Findings and Recommendation on August 21, 2019, in which she recommends that the Court reverse and remand the decision of the Commissioner. The matter is now before this Court pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1) and Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 72(b).
Defendant timely filed objections to the Findings and Recommendation. When a party objects to any portion of the Magistrate Judge's Findings and Recommendation, the district court must make a de novo determination of that portion of the Magistrate Judge's report. 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1); Dawson v. Marshall, 561 F.3d 930, 932 (9th Cir. 2009); United States v. Reyna-Tapia, 328 F.3d 1114, 1121 (9th Cir. 2003) (en banc).
The Court has carefully considered Defendant's objections and concludes that the objections do not provide a basis to modify the recommendation. The Court has also reviewed the pertinent portions of the record de novo and finds no error in the Magistrate Judge's Findings and Recommendation.
CONCLUSION
The Court adopts Magistrate Judge Sullivan's Findings and Recommendation [19]. The decision of the Commissioner is reversed and remanded for further proceedings.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Source: Leagle
