Mcdonald v. Commissioner of Social Security

Filing 26

ORDER. IT IS ORDERED that 24 the Report and Recommendation is ACCEPTED and ADOPTED in full. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that 19 the Commissioner's countermotion to affirm and 22 supplemental motion for summary judgment are DENIED, and that this case is REMANDED for further proceeding. Signed by Judge Richard F. Boulware, II on 9/21/2018. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - cc: Plaintiff - ADR)

1
2
3
4
5
6

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

7

DISTRICT OF NEVADA

8

***

9

MIA ANNE MCDONALD,

10
11
12
13

Case No. 2:17-cv-01445-RFB-NJK
Plaintiff,

v.

ORDER

COMMISSIONER OF SOCIAL SECURITY,
Defendant.

14
15
Before the Court for consideration is the Report and Recommendation (ECF No. 24) of the
16
Honorable Nancy J. Koppe, United States Magistrate Judge, entered August 22, 2018.
17
A district court “may accept, reject, or modify, in whole or in part, the findings or
18
recommendations made by the magistrate.” 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1). A party may file specific
19
written objections to the findings and recommendations of a magistrate judge. 28 U.S.C. §
20
636(b)(1); Local Rule IB 3-2(a). When written objections have been filed, the district court is
21
required to “make a de novo determination of those portions of the report or specified proposed
22
findings or recommendations to which objection is made.” 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1); see also Local
23
Rule IB 3-2(b). Where a party fails to object, however, a district court is not required to conduct
24
“any review,” de novo or otherwise, of the report and recommendations of a magistrate judge.
25
Thomas v. Arn, 474 U.S. 140, 149 (1985). Pursuant to Local Rule IB 3-2(a), objections were due
26
by September 5, 2018. No objections have been filed. The Court has reviewed the record in this
27
case and concurs with the Magistrate Judge’s recommendations.
28
1

1
2

IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that the Report and Recommendation (ECF No. 24) is
ACCEPTED and ADOPTED in full.

3

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Commissioner’s countermotion to affirm (Docket

4

No. 19) and supplemental motion for summary judgment (Docket No. 22) are DENIED, and that

5

this case is REMANDED for further proceeding.

6

The Clerk of Court is directed to serve a copy of this Order upon Plaintiff

7
8

DATED this 21st day of September, 2018.

9
______________________________
RICHARD F. BOULWARE, II
UNITED STATES DISTRCIT JUDGE

10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
2