From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Apodaca v. Astrue

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF OREGON EUGENE
Oct 17, 2011
Civil No. 10-314-TC (D. Or. Oct. 17, 2011)

Opinion

Civil No. 10-314-TC

10-17-2011

KIMBERLY APODACA, Plaintiff, v. MICHAEL J. ASTRUE, Defendant


ORDER

Magistrate Judge Thomas M Coffin has filed his Findings and Recommendation on September 7, 2011. 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. Lorin Corp. v. Goto & Co., Ltd., 700 F.2d 1202, 1206 (9th Cir. 1982). See also Britt v. Simi Valley Unified School Dist., 708 F. 2d 452, 454 (9th Cir. 1983). Having reviewed the legal principles de novo, I find no error.

Accordingly, I ADOPT Judge Coffins Findings and Recommendation. This matter is remanded to the Commissioner pursuant to sentence four of 42 U.S.C § 405(g) for further proceedings consistent with the court's Findings and Recommendations.

________________________________

United States District Judge


Summaries of

Apodaca v. Astrue

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF OREGON EUGENE
Oct 17, 2011
Civil No. 10-314-TC (D. Or. Oct. 17, 2011)
Case details for

Apodaca v. Astrue

Case Details

Full title:KIMBERLY APODACA, Plaintiff, v. MICHAEL J. ASTRUE, Defendant

Court:UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF OREGON EUGENE

Date published: Oct 17, 2011

Citations

Civil No. 10-314-TC (D. Or. Oct. 17, 2011)