Perez v. Commissioner of Social Security

Opinion

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 10 11 TERESA P., Case No.: 24-cv-00100-AJB-DDL Plaintiff, 12 ORDER: v. 13 (1) ADOPTING REPORT AND COMMISSIONER OF SOCIAL 14 RECOMMENDATION; SECURITY,

15 Defendant. (2) REMANDING ACTION FOR

17 (Doc. Nos. 10, 16) 18 19 Presently before the Court is Plaintiff Teresa P.’s social security appeal. (Doc. 20 No. 10.) The Court referred the matter to Magistrate Judge David D. Leshner for a Report 21 and Recommendation (“R&R”). (Doc. No. 16.) The R&R recommends remanding the 22 matter back to the Commissioner for further administrative action. (Id. at 1, 14.) The 23 parties were instructed to file written objections to the R&R no later than February 13, 24 2025, and replies no later than February 20, 2025. (Id. at 14.) 25 Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 72(b) and 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1) set forth a district 26 judge’s duties in connection with a magistrate judge’s R&R. The district judge must “make 27 a de novo determination of those portions of the report . . . to which objection is made[,]” 28 and “may accept, reject, or modify, in whole or in part, the findings or recommendations 1 made by the magistrate judge.” 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1); see also United States v. Remsing, 2 || 874 F.2d 614, 617 (9th Cir. 1989). However, in the absence of objection(s), the Court “need 3 || only satisfy itself that there is no clear error on the face of the record in order to accept the 4 ||recommendation.” Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b) advisory committee note to 1983 amendment; see 5 || also United States v. Reyna-Tapia, 328 F.3d 1114, 1121 (9th Cir. 2003). 6 Neither party has filed objections to the R&R. Having reviewed the R&R, the Court 7 finds it thorough, well-reasoned, and contains no clear error. Accordingly, the Court 8 ||hereby: (1) ADOPTS Magistrate Judge Leshner’s R&R, (Doc. No. 16); and 9 ||(2) REMANDS the case back to the Commissioner for further review pursuant to 42 10 U.S.C. § 405(g). 11 13 Dated: February 23, 2025 © ¢ 14 Hon. Anthony J. attaglia 15 United States District Judge 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28