Williams v. Astrue

Full title: SHIRLEY L. WILLIAMS, Plaintiff, v. MICHAEL J. ASTRUE, Commissioner of…

Court: UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF OREGON

Date published: Feb 1, 2012

No. 1:10-cv-00194-CL (D. Or. Feb. 1, 2012)

Opinion

No. 1:10-cv-00194-CL

02-01-2012

SHIRLEY L. WILLIAMS, Plaintiff, v. MICHAEL J. ASTRUE, Commissioner of Social Security Defendant.

OWEN M. FANNER

ORDER

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 (#19) is adopted. Pursuant to sentence four of 42 U.S.C. § 405(g), the decision of the Commissioner is reversed and remanded for further proceedings consistent with the Report and Recommendation.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

_________________

OWEN M. FANNER

U.S. DISTRICT JUDGE