Williams v. Commissioner of Social Security

Filing 22

ORDER that 21 Report and Recommendation is ACCEPTED and ADOPTED in full.FURTHER ORDERED that 13 Plaintiff Robyn J. Williams' Motion for Reversal or Remand is GRANTED.FURTHER ORDERED that 18 the Commissioner's Cross-Motion to Affirm is DENIED.FURTHER ORDERED that this case be remanded to the Social Security Administration.The Clerk of Court is instructed to close the 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
ROBYN J. WILLIAMS,
4
Plaintiff,

5
6

vs.
CAROLYN W. COLVIN,

7
Defendant.

8
9

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

Case No.: 2:16-cv-00701-GMN-GWF
ORDER

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

10

Magistrate Judge George W. Foley, Jr., (ECF No. 21), which recommends that Plaintiff Robyn

11

J. Williams’ Motion for Reversal or Remand, (ECF No. 13), be granted and the

12

Commissioner’s Cross-Motion to Affirm, (ECF No. 18), be denied.

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. 21), is

4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11

ACCEPTED and ADOPTED in full.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Plaintiff Robyn J. Williams’ Motion for Reversal or
Remand, (ECF No. 13), is GRANTED.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Commissioner’s Cross-Motion to Affirm, (ECF
No. 18), is DENIED.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that this case be remanded to the Social Security
Administration.
The Clerk of Court is instructed to close the case.

12
13

10
DATED this ________ day of April, 2018.

14
15
16

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

17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25

Page 2 of 2