From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Vinje v. Apfel

United States District Court, D. Oregon
Jan 16, 2001
Civil No. 00-6045-ST (D. Or. Jan. 16, 2001)

Opinion

Civil No. 00-6045-ST

January 16, 2001


ORDER


Magistrate Judge Stewart filed her Findings and Recommendation on December 20, 2000. 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 (8th Cir. 1983); 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 the Magistrate's Findings and Recommendation (doc. 21) that the decision of the Commissioner should be reversed and remanded pursuant to sentence four of 42 U.S.C. § 405(g) for an award of benefits.

IT IS SO ORDERED.


Summaries of

Vinje v. Apfel

United States District Court, D. Oregon
Jan 16, 2001
Civil No. 00-6045-ST (D. Or. Jan. 16, 2001)
Case details for

Vinje v. Apfel

Case Details

Full title:LYNNAE VINJE, Plaintiff, v. KENNETH S. APFEL, Commissioner of Social…

Court:United States District Court, D. Oregon

Date published: Jan 16, 2001

Citations

Civil No. 00-6045-ST (D. Or. Jan. 16, 2001)