From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

McCorduck v. Astrue

United States District Court, D. Oregon
Mar 24, 2009
Civ. No. 08-6022-CL (D. Or. Mar. 24, 2009)

Opinion

Civ. No. 08-6022-CL.

March 24, 2009


ORDER


Magistrate Judge Mark D. Clarke filed Findings and Recommendation, and the matter is now before this court. See 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B), Fed.R.Civ.P. 72(b). Although no objections have been timely filed, this court reviews legal principles de novo. See Lorin Corp. v Goto Co., Ltd., 700 F.2d 1202, 1206 (9th Cir. 1983). I find no error. Accordingly, I ADOPT the Findings and Recommendation of Magistrate Judge Clarke.

CONCLUSION

Magistrate Judge Clarke's Findings and Recommendation (#18) is adopted. The decision of the Commissioner is reversed and the matter is remanded for immediate calculation and award of benefits.

IT IS SO ORDERED.


Summaries of

McCorduck v. Astrue

United States District Court, D. Oregon
Mar 24, 2009
Civ. No. 08-6022-CL (D. Or. Mar. 24, 2009)
Case details for

McCorduck v. Astrue

Case Details

Full title:KIMBERLY A. McCORDUCK, Plaintiff, v. MICHAEL J. ASTRUE, Commissioner…

Court:United States District Court, D. Oregon

Date published: Mar 24, 2009

Citations

Civ. No. 08-6022-CL (D. Or. Mar. 24, 2009)

Citing Cases

Irwin v. Astrue

The ALJ's reasons are not clear and convincing. "[A]n ALJ may not find a claimant not credible simply because…

Palmer v. Astrue

(Id. at 15.) As in McCorduck v. Astrue, 2009 WL 783354 (D. Or. March 24, 2009) and Lingenfelter v. Astrue,…