From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Angeles v. Berryhill

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF OREGON PORTLAND DIVISION
Nov 12, 2018
Case No. 3:17-cv-01575-JR (D. Or. Nov. 12, 2018)

Opinion

Case No. 3:17-cv-01575-JR

11-12-2018

KENNETH A., Plaintiff, v. NANCY A. BERRYHILL, Acting Commissioner of the Social Security Administration, Defendant,


OPINION AND ORDER MOSMAN, J.,

On September 4, 2018, Magistrate Judge Paul Papak issued his Findings and Recommendation (F&R) [19], recommending that I REVERSE and REMAND for the immediate payment of benefits. Neither party objected.

DISCUSSION

The magistrate judge makes only recommendations to the court, to which any party may file written objections. The court is not bound by the recommendations of the magistrate judge, but retains responsibility for making the final determination. The court is generally required to make a de novo determination regarding those portions of the report or specified findings or recommendation as to which an objection is made. 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C). However, the court is not required to review, de novo or under any other standard, the factual or legal conclusions of the magistrate judge as to those portions of the F&R to which no objections are addressed. See Thomas v. Arn, 474 U.S. 140, 149 (1985); United States v. Reyna-Tapia, 328 F.3d 1114, 1121 (9th Cir. 2003). While the level of scrutiny under which I am required to review the F&R depends on whether or not objections have been filed, in either case, I am free to accept, reject, or modify any part of the F&R. 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C).

CONCLUSION

Upon review, I agree with Judge Papak's recommendation and I ADOPT the F&R [19] in full. I REVERSE and REMAND for the immediate payment of benefits.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

DATED this 12th day of November, 2018.

/s/_________

MICHAEL W. MOSMAN

Chief United States District Judge


Summaries of

Angeles v. Berryhill

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF OREGON PORTLAND DIVISION
Nov 12, 2018
Case No. 3:17-cv-01575-JR (D. Or. Nov. 12, 2018)
Case details for

Angeles v. Berryhill

Case Details

Full title:KENNETH A., Plaintiff, v. NANCY A. BERRYHILL, Acting Commissioner of the…

Court:UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF OREGON PORTLAND DIVISION

Date published: Nov 12, 2018

Citations

Case No. 3:17-cv-01575-JR (D. Or. Nov. 12, 2018)