Scott v. Colvin

Filing 15

ORDER adopting ECF No. 14 Report and Recommendation; denying ECF No. 11 Motion to Remand to Agency; and granting ECF No. 12 Motion to Affirm. Clerk to enter judgment and close case. Signed by Judge Jennifer A. Dorsey on 5/25/16. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - JC)

Download PDF
1 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 2 DISTRICT OF NEVADA 3 4 Rush H. Scott, 2:14-cv-02077-JAD-CWH 5 Plaintiff 6 v. 7 Carolyn W. Colvin, Acting Commissioner of Social Security Administration, Order Adopting Report and Recommendation, Denying Motion for Reversal or Remand, and Granting CrossMotion to Affirm 8 Defendant [ECF Nos. 11, 12, 14] 9 10 Rush Scott filed this action to seek review of the Social Security Commissioner’s denial of 11 his application for disability insurance benefits. Magistrate Judge Hoffman recommends that I deny 12 Scott’s motion for reversal or remand and grant the Commissioner’s cross-motion to affirm.1 13 Objections to the magistrate judge’s recommendation were due May 20, 2016, and neither party has 14 filed an objection or requested an extension to do so. “[N]o review is required of a magistrate 15 judge’s report and recommendation unless objections are filed.”2 16 Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED, ADJUDGED, and DECREED that Magistrate 17 Judge Hoffman’s report and recommendation [ECF No. 14] is ADOPTED; Scott’s motion to 18 remand to social security [ECF No. 11] is DENIED; and the Commissioner’s motion to affirm 19 [ECF No. 12] is GRANTED. 20 The Clerk of Court is directed to enter judgment accordingly and CLOSE THIS CASE. 21 Dated this 25th day of May, 2016. 22 _________________________________ Jennifer A. Dorsey United States District Judge 23 24 25 26 27 1 28 2 ECF No. 14. Schmidt v. Johnstone, 263 F. Supp. 2d 1219, 1226 (D. Ariz. 2003); see also Thomas v. Arn, 474 U.S. 140, 150 (1985); United States v. Reyna-Tapia, 328 F.3d 1114, 1121 (9th Cir. 2003).

Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.


Why Is My Information Online?