Finney v. Social Security Administration

Filing 66

ORDER signed by District Judge Troy L. Nunley on 11/6/14 ORDERING that 44 the proposed Findings and Recommendations are ADOPTED. Defendant's 17 motion for summary judgment is granted. Plaintiff's 23 motion to conduct discovery pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 56(d) is denied. The Clerk is directed to enter judgment in Defendant's favor and once again close this case. CASE CLOSED (Kastilahn, A)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

10
11

STANLEY FINNEY,

12
13
14
15

No. 2:12-cv-2805-TLN-EFB PS

Plaintiff,
v.

ORDER

SOCIAL SECURITY
ADMINISTRATION,
Defendant.

16
17
18

On March 14, 2014, the magistrate judge filed findings and recommendations herein,

19

which were served on the parties and contained notice that any objections to the findings and

20

recommendations were to be filed within fourteen days. On March 31, 2014, the undersigned

21

adopted the findings and recommendations in full. That order granted summary judgment to

22

Defendant and closed the case. On April 9, 2014, Plaintiff filed a belated request for an extension

23

of time to file his objections to the March 14, 2014, findings and recommendations. By order

24

filed May 12, 2014 (ECF No. 54), the March 31 order was vacated and Plaintiff was granted an

25

opportunity to file objections. After extensions of time, Plaintiff filed objections on July 30,

26

2014, Defendant filed a response thereto on August 7, 2014, and both filings were considered by

27

the undersigned.

28
1

1

This Court reviews de novo those portions of the proposed findings of fact to which

2

objection has been made. 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1); McDonnell Douglas Corp. v. Commodore

3

Business Machines, 656 F.2d 1309, 1313 (9th Cir. 1981), cert. denied, 455 U.S. 920 (1982). As

4

to any portion of the proposed findings of fact to which no objection has been made, the Court

5

assumes its correctness and decides the motions on the applicable law. See Orand v. United

6

States, 602 F.2d 207, 208 (9th Cir. 1979). The magistrate judge’s conclusions of law are

7

reviewed de novo. See Britt v. Simi Valley Unified Sch. Dist., 708 F.2d 452, 454 (9th Cir. 1983).

8

The Court has reviewed the applicable legal standards and, good cause appearing,

9
10

concludes that it is appropriate to adopt the proposed findings and recommendations in full.
Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED that:

11

1. The proposed Findings and Recommendations filed March 14, 2014, are ADOPTED;

12

2. Defendant’s motion for summary judgment, ECF No. 17, is granted;

13

3. Plaintiff’s motion to conduct discovery pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure

14
15

56(d), ECF No. 23, is denied; and
4. The Clerk is directed to enter judgment in Defendant’s favor and once again close

16

this case.

17

Dated: November 6, 2014

18
19
20
21

Troy L. Nunley
United States District Judge

22
23
24
25
26
27
28
2