Majalca-Williams v. Commissioner of Social Security Administration

Opinion

1 2 3 4 5 6 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 7 FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA

9 Dionne Majalca-Williams, No. CV-24-00385-TUC-RM

10 Plaintiff, ORDER

11 v.

12 Commissioner of Social Security Administration, 13 Defendant. 14 15 On June 27, 2025, Magistrate Judge Jacqueline Rateau issued a Report and 16 Recommendation (Doc. 28), recommending that this Court reverse the final decision of 17 the Commissioner of the Social Security Administration and remand the matter for the 18 calculation and award of benefits. No objections to the Report and Recommendation 19 were filed. 20 A district judge must “make a de novo determination of those portions” of a 21 magistrate judge’s “report or specified proposed findings or recommendations to which 22 objection is made.” 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1). The advisory committee’s notes to Rule 23 72(b) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure state that, “[w]hen no timely objection is 24 filed, the court need only satisfy itself that there is no clear error on the face of the record 25 in order to accept the recommendation” of a magistrate judge. Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b) 26 advisory committee’s note to 1983 addition. See also Johnson v. Zema Sys. Corp., 170 27 F.3d 734, 739 (7th Cir. 1999) (“If no objection or only partial objection is made, the 28 district court judge reviews those unobjected portions for clear error.”); Prior v. Ryan, |} CV 10-225-TUC-RCC, 2012 WL 1344286, at *1 (D. Ariz. Apr. 18, 2012) (reviewing for 2|| clear error unobjected-to portions of Report and Recommendation). 3 The Court has reviewed Magistrate Judge Rateau’s Report and Recommendation, the parties’ briefs, and the record. The Court finds no error in Magistrate Judge Rateau’s || Report and Recommendation. Accordingly, 6 IT IS ORDERED that the Report and Recommendation (Doc. 28) is accepted and adopted in full. 8 IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the final decision of the Commissioner of Social Security is reversed, and this case is remanded to the agency for the calculation and award of benefits to Plaintiff Dionne Majalca-Williams. The Clerk of Court is 11 |} directed to enter judgment in favor of Plaintiff and close this case. 12 IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Defendant’s Motion for Voluntary Remand 13 || (Doc. 26) is denied as moot. 14 Dated this 17th day of July, 2025. 15 16 17 — ble l a 18 a) Z Honorable Rostsiary □□□□□□□ 19 United States District □□□□□ 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28

_2-