Johnson v. Colvin

Filing 27

ORDER. IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the Report and Recommendation 26 is ACCEPTED and ADOPTED in full. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Plaintiffs Motion for Remand 15 is DENIED. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Defendants Cross-Motion to Affirm 24 is GRANTED.The Clerk of the Court shall enter judgment accordingly and close the case. Signed by Chief Judge Gloria M. Navarro on 8/25/2016. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - DL)

1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

2

DISTRICT OF NEVADA

3
SUSAN JOHNSON,
4
5
6

Plaintiff,
vs.
CAROLYN W. COLVIN,

7
8

Defendant.

9

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

Case No.: 2:15-cv-1600-GMN-VCF
ORDER

10
11

Pending before the Court is the Report and Recommendation of United States

12

Magistrate Judge Cam Ferenbach (ECF No. 26), which recommends denying Plaintiff Susan

13

Johnson’s Motion for Remand (ECF No. 15) and granting Defendant Carolyn W. Colvin’s

14

Cross-Motion to Affirm (ECF No. 24).

15

A party may file specific written objections to the findings and recommendations of a

16

United States Magistrate Judge made pursuant to Local Rule IB 1-4. 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B);

17

D. Nev. R. IB 3-2. Upon the filing of such objections, the Court must make a de novo

18

determination of those portions to which objections are made. Id. The Court may accept, reject,

19

or modify, in whole or in part, the findings or recommendations made by the Magistrate Judge.

20

28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1); D. Nev. IB 3-2(b). Where a party fails to object, however, the Court is

21

not required to conduct “any review at all . . . of any issue that is not the subject of an

22

objection.” Thomas v. Arn, 474 U.S. 140, 149 (1985). Indeed, the Ninth Circuit has recognized

23

that a district court is not required to review a magistrate judge’s report and recommendation

24

where no objections have been filed. See, e.g., United States v. Reyna–Tapia, 328 F.3d 1114,

25

1122 (9th Cir. 2003).
Page 1 of 2

1

Here, no objections were filed, and the deadline to do so has passed.

2

Accordingly,

3

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the Report and Recommendation (ECF No. 26) is

4
5
6
7
8
9

ACCEPTED and ADOPTED in full.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Plaintiff’s Motion for Remand (ECF No. 15) is
DENIED.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Defendant’s Cross-Motion to Affirm (ECF No. 24)
is GRANTED.
The Clerk of the Court shall enter judgment accordingly and close the case.

10
11

25
DATED this ___ day of August, 2016.

12
13
14

___________________________________
Gloria M. Navarro, Chief Judge
United States District Court

15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25

Page 2 of 2