RANF v. ASTRUE

Full title: MICHAEL S. RANF, Plaintiff, v. MICHAEL J. ASTRUE, Commissioner of Social…

Court: United States District Court, D. Oregon

Date published: Mar 1, 2011

Civ. No. 09-586-CL (D. Or. Mar. 1, 2011)

Opinion

Civ. No. 09-586-CL.

March 1, 2011

ORDER

OWEN PANNER, District Judge

Magistrate Judge Mark D. Clarke filed a Report 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). When either party objects to any portion of a Magistrate Judge's Report and Recommendation, the district court makes a de novo determination of that portion of the Magistrate Judge's report. 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C); McDonnell Douglas Corp. v. Commodore Bus. Mach., Inc., 656 F. 2d 1309, 1313 (9th Cir. 1981).

Here, plaintiff objects to the Report and Recommendation, so I have reviewed this matter de novo. I agree with Magistrate Judge Clarke's proposed disposition. Accordingly, I ADOPT the Report and Recommendation of Magistrate Judge Clarke.

CONCLUSION

Magistrate Judge Clarke's Report and Recommendation (#20) is adopted. Pursuant to sentence four of 42 U.S.C. § 405(g), the decision of the Commissioner is reversed in part and remanded for further proceedings consistent with the Report and Recommendation.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

DATED this 28 day of February, 2010.