Andranik Karagulyan v. Kilolo Kijakazi

Opinion

Case 2:21-cv-07403-SPG-JDE Document 25 Filed 02/01/23 Page 1 of 2 Page ID #:657

ANDRANIK KARAGULYAN, ) Case No. 2:21-cv-07403-SPG-JDE ) ) Plaintiff, ) ORDER ACCEPTING REPORT ) AND RECOMMENDATION OF v. ) ) UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE KILOLO KIJAKAZI, Acting ) JUDGE ) Commissioner of Social Security, ) ) Defendant. ) ) ) Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636, the Court has reviewed the Complaint, the Joint Stipulation of the parties, the records on file, the Report and Recommendation of the assigned United States Magistrate Judge, the Objections to the Report filed by Plaintiff, and the Reply to the Objections filed by Defendant. The Court has engaged in a de novo review of those portions of the Report and Recommendation to which objections have been made. The Court accepts the findings and recommendation of the Magistrate Judge. To the extent Plaintiff attempts to raise new arguments in the Objections, the Court declines to formally address these belatedly-asserted ase 2:21-cv-07403-SPG-JDE Document 25 Filed 02/01/23 Page2of2 Page ID#:65

allegations. A district court has discretion, but is not required, to consider evidence or claims presented for the first time in objections to a report and recommendation. See Brown v. Roe, 279 F.3d 742, 744-45 (9th Cir. 2002); see also United States v. Howell, 231 F.3d 615, 621-22 (9th Cir. 2000). Importantly, Petitioner is represented by counsel in this social security matter and his new arguments are not novel, factors that weigh against the Court’s review of tardy arguments. See Sossa v. Diaz, 729 F.3d 1225, 1231 (9th Cir. 2013) (district court abuses its discretion when it fails to consider new and “novel” arguments ? presented by a pro se habeas petitioner in objecting to a magistrate judges report and recommendation). Nevertheless, the Court has considered all of Plaintiffs i argument as presented in the Objections and find they lack merit. IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that Judgment be entered affirming the decision of the Commissioner of Social Security and dismissing this matter ‘4 with prejudice. Dated: February 1, 2023 H-——— SHERILYN PEACE GARNETT UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE