From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Matthews v. Astrue

United States District Court, D. Oregon
Jul 12, 2010
Civil No. 09-184-JE (D. Or. Jul. 12, 2010)

Opinion

Civil No. 09-184-JE.

July 12, 2010


ORDER


Magistrate Judge John Jelderks filed his Findings and Recommendation on June 15, 2010. The matter is now before me. See 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) and Fed.R. Civ P. 72(b). No objections have been timely filed. This relieves me of my obligation to give the factual findings de novo review. See § 636(b)(1)(C); Simpson v. Lear Astronics Corp., 77 F.3d 1170, 1174-75 (9th Cir. 1996). Having reviewed the legal principles de novo, I find no error.

Accordingly, I ADOPT Magistrate Judge Jelderks' Findings and Recommendation #13. The decision of the Commissioner is AFFIRMED; this action is DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE.

IT IS SO ORDERED.


Summaries of

Matthews v. Astrue

United States District Court, D. Oregon
Jul 12, 2010
Civil No. 09-184-JE (D. Or. Jul. 12, 2010)
Case details for

Matthews v. Astrue

Case Details

Full title:CRAIG MATTHEWS, SUBSTITUTE PARTY FOR LAURA LEE MATTHEWS, Plaintiff, v…

Court:United States District Court, D. Oregon

Date published: Jul 12, 2010

Citations

Civil No. 09-184-JE (D. Or. Jul. 12, 2010)