Yager v. Colvin

Filing 24

ORDER that 23 Report and Recommendation is ACCEPTED and ADOPTED in full.FURTHER ORDERED that 14 Plaintiff Robin Rose Peterson Yager's Motion to Modify, Reverse, or Remand is DENIED.FURTHER ORDERED that 18 the Commissioner's Cr oss-Motion to Affirm is GRANTED.FURTHER ORDERED that the Clerk's Office shall enter judgment accordingly and close this case. Signed by Chief Judge Gloria M. Navarro on 4/10/2018. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - MMM)

1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

2

DISTRICT OF NEVADA

3
ROBIN ROSE PETERSON YAGER,
4
Plaintiff,

5
6

vs.
CAROLYN W. COLVIN,

7
Defendant.

8
9

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

Case No.: 2:16-cv-00051-GMN-VCF
ORDER

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

10

Magistrate Judge Cam Ferenbach, (ECF No. 23), which recommends that Plaintiff Robin Rose

11

Peterson Yager’s Motion to Modify, Reverse, or Remand be denied and that the

12

Commissioner’s Cross-Motion to Affirm be granted.

13

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

14

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

15

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

16

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

17

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

18

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

19

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

20

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

21

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

22

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

23

1122 (9th Cir. 2003).

24

///

25

///

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. 23), is

4
5
6
7
8
9
10

ACCEPTED and ADOPTED in full.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Plaintiff Robin Rose Peterson Yager’s Motion to
Modify, Reverse, or Remand, (ECF No. 14), is DENIED.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Commissioner’s Cross-Motion to Affirm, (ECF
No. 18), is GRANTED.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Clerk’s Office shall enter judgment accordingly
and close this case.

11
12

10
DATED this ________ day of April, 2018.

13
14
15

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

16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25

Page 2 of 2