Moore v. Saul

Opinion

JULIE R. M., Case No.: 20cv1608-LL-MDD

Plaintiff, ORDER: (1) ADOPTING REPORT v. AND RECOMMENDATION [ECF No. 19]; KILOLO KIJAKAZI, Acting

Commissioner of Social Security,1 (2) GRANTING PLAINTIFF’S Defendant. MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT [ECF No. 16]; AND (3) DENYING DEFENDANT’S CROSS-MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT [ECF No. 17]

Pending before the Court is the Report and Recommendation (“R&R”) of Magistrate Judge Mitchell D. Dembin, filed on October 26, 2021, recommending that the 1 Kilolo Kijakazi became the Acting Commissioner of Social Security on July 9, 2021. Pursuant to Rule 25(d) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, the Court DIRECTS the Clerk’s Office to modify the docket by substituting Kilolo Kijakazi for Andrew Saul as }Court grant Plaintiff's Julie R. M.’s motion for summary judgment, deny Defendant’s cross-motion for summary judgment, and remand for further proceedings. ECF No. 19. Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 72(b) and 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1) set forth a district court’s duties in connection with a magistrate judge’s report and recommendation. The district court must “make a de novo determination of those portions of the report to which objection is made,” and “may accept, reject, or modify, in whole or in part, the findings or recommendations made by the magistrate judge.” 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1); see also United States. v. Raddatz, 447 U.S. 667, 673-76 (1980); United States v. Remsing, 874 F.2d 614, 617 (9th Cir. 1989). However, in the absence of timely objection, the Court “need only satisfy itself that there is no clear error on the face of the record in order to accept the recommendation.” Fed.R.Civ.P. 72 advisory committee’s note (citing Campbell v. U.S. Dist. Court, 501 F.2d 196, 206) (9th Cir. 1974)); see also United States v. Reyna-Tapia, 1/328 F.3d 1114, 1121 (9th Cir. 2003)([T]he district judge must review the magistrate judge’s findings and recommendations de novo if objection is made, but not otherwise.”). Here, neither party has timely filed objections to Magistrate Judge Dembin’s R&R See Doc. No. 19 at 20 (objections due by November 9, 2021). Having reviewed the R&R, the Court finds that it is thorough, well-reasoned, and contains no clear error. Accordingly, Court hereby: (1) ADOPTS Magistrate Dembin’s report and recommendation; (2) GRANTS Plaintiffs motion for summary judgment; (3) DENIES Defendant’s cross- motion for summary judgment; and (4) REMANDS the case for further proceedings. This Order concludes the litigation in this matter. The Clerk shall close the file. IT IS SO ORDERED. Dated: January 25, 2022 NO DE | Honorable Linda Lopez United States District Judge