From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Adame v. Berryhill

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF OREGON
Jan 12, 2018
No. 6:16-cv-01761-PK (D. Or. Jan. 12, 2018)

Opinion

No. 6:16-cv-01761-PK

01-12-2018

VALERIE ADAME, Plaintiff, v. NANCY A. BERRYHILL, Defendant.


ORDER :

Magistrate Judge Papak issued a Findings and Recommendation (#17) on November 29, 2017, in which he recommends that this Court affirm the Commissioner's decision to deny Plaintiff disability benefits. The matter is now before me pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) and Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 72(b).

Because no objections to the Magistrate Judge's Findings and Recommendation were timely filed, I am relieved of my obligation to review the record de novo. United States v. Reyna-Tapia, 328 F.3d 1114, 1121 (9th Cir. 2003) (en banc); see also United States v. Bernhardt, 840 F.2d 1441, 1444 (9th Cir. 1988) (de novo review required only for portions of Magistrate Judge's report to which objections have been made). Having reviewed the legal principles de novo, I find no error.

CONCLUSION

The Court ADOPTS Magistrate Judge Papak's Findings & Recommendation [17]. Accordingly, the Commissioner's decision is affirmed.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

DATED this 12 day of January, 2018.

/s/_________

MARCO A. HERNANDEZ

United States District Judge


Summaries of

Adame v. Berryhill

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF OREGON
Jan 12, 2018
No. 6:16-cv-01761-PK (D. Or. Jan. 12, 2018)
Case details for

Adame v. Berryhill

Case Details

Full title:VALERIE ADAME, Plaintiff, v. NANCY A. BERRYHILL, Defendant.

Court:UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF OREGON

Date published: Jan 12, 2018

Citations

No. 6:16-cv-01761-PK (D. Or. Jan. 12, 2018)