Whitman v. Colvin

Filing 25

ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION of United States Magistrate Judge; Denying Plaintiff's 22 Motion for Summary Judgment; Granting Defendant's 23 Cross-Motion for Summary Judgement. Signed by Judge Michael M. Anello on 7/11/2017.(ag)

1
2
3
4
5
6

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

7
8
9
10
11
12

SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
JOEY DALE WHITMAN,

Case No.: 16cv28-MMA (JMA)
ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND
RECOMMENDATION OF UNITED
STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE;

Plaintiff,

v.

NANCY A. BERRYHILL,1 Acting
Commissioner of Social Security,

13

[Doc. No. 24]
DENYING PLAINTIFF’S MOTION
FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT;

Defendant.

14

[Doc. No. 22]

15
16

GRANTING DEFENDANT’S CROSSMOTION FOR SUMMARY
JUDGMENT

17

[Doc. No. 23]

18
19
20

On January 6, 2016, Plaintiff Joey Dale Whitman filed this social security appeal

21

pursuant to Section 205(g) of the Social Security Act, 42 U.S.C. § 405(g), challenging the

22

denial of his application for disability benefits. Doc. 1. After granting Plaintiff leave to

23

proceed in forma pauperis (“IFP”), the Court referred all matters arising in this social

24

security appeal to the Honorable Jan M. Adler, United States Magistrate Judge, for report

25

and recommendation pursuant to section 636(b)(1)(B) of title 28 of the United States

26
27
28

1

Nancy A. Berryhill is substituted as the Acting Commissioner of Social Security, replacing Carolyn W.
Colvin.
-1-

16cv28-MMA (JMA)

1

Code and Civil Local Rule 72.1. See Doc. Nos. 10, 12; 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B); S.D.

2

Cal. Civ. R. 72.1.

3

On May 18, 2017, Judge Adler issued a thorough and well-reasoned Report

4

containing findings and conclusions, upon which he bases his Recommendation that the

5

Court deny Plaintiff’s motion for summary judgment and grant Defendant’s cross motion

6

for summary judgment. See Doc. No. 24. Neither party objected to the Report and

7

Recommendation, and the time for filing objections has expired.

8

The duties of the district court in connection with a magistrate judge’s report and

9

recommendation are set forth in Rule 72(b) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure and

10

28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1). Where the parties object to a report and recommendation, “[a]

11

judge of the [district] court shall make a de novo determination of those portions of the

12

[R&R] to which objection is made.” 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1); see Thomas v. Arn, 474 U.S.

13

140, 149-50 (1985). When no objections are filed, the district court need not review the

14

R&R de novo. Wang v. Masaitis, 416 F.3d 992, 1000 n.13 (9th Cir. 2005); United States

15

v. Reyna-Tapia, 328 F.3d 1114, 1121-22 (9th Cir. 2003) (en banc). A district judge may

16

nevertheless “accept, reject, or modify, in whole or in part, the findings or

17

recommendations made by the magistrate judge.” 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1); Wilkins v.

18

Ramirez, 455 F. Supp. 2d 1080, 1088 (S.D. Cal. 2006); Or. Natural Desert Ass’n v.

19

Rasmussen, 451 F. Supp. 2d 1202, 1205 (D. Or. 2006).

20

Here, the Court has considered the pleadings and memoranda of the parties as well

21

as the administrative record, and has made a review and determination in accordance with

22

the requirements of 28 U.S.C. § 636 and applicable case law. Accordingly,

23

1.

24
25

24] in its entirety;
2.

26
27
28

The Court ADOPTS Judge Adler’s Report and Recommendation [Doc. No.
The Court DENIES Plaintiff’s Motion for Summary Judgment [Doc. No.
22]; and,

3.

The Court GRANTS Defendant’s Cross-Motion for Summary Judgment
[Doc. No. 23].
-2-

16cv28-MMA (JMA)

1
2

The Clerk of Court shall enter judgment accordingly and terminate the action.
IT IS SO ORDERED.

3
4
5
6

Date: July 11, 2017

_____________________________
Hon. Michael M. Anello
United States District Judge

7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
-3-

16cv28-MMA (JMA)