Gonzalez v. Commissioner of Social Security Administration
Filing
28
ORDER. IT IS ORDERED that 27 Magistrate Judge Koppe's report and recommendation is accepted, 19 plaintiff Sonia Gonzalez's motion to remand is DENIED, and 21 defendant Andrew Saul's motion to affirm is GRANTED. The clerk of court is instructed to enter judgment accordingly and close this case. Signed by Judge Andrew P. Gordon on 12/4/2019. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - ADR)
1
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
2
DISTRICT OF NEVADA
3 SONIA M. GONZALEZ,
4
Plaintiff
5 v.
6 ANDREW SAUL,
7
8
Case No.: 2:17-cv-03118-APG-NJK
Order Accepting Report and
Recommendation, Denying Motion to
Remand, and Granting Motion to Affirm
[ECF Nos. 19, 21, 27]
Defendant
On November 15, 2019, Magistrate Judge Koppe recommended that I deny plaintiff
9 Sonia Gonzalez’s motion to remand and grant defendant Andrew Saul’s motion to affirm. ECF
10 No. 27. Gonzalez did not file an objection. Thus, I am not obligated to conduct a de novo
11 review of the report and recommendation. 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1) (requiring district courts to
12 “make a de novo determination of those portions of the report or specified proposed findings to
13 which objection is made”); United States v. Reyna-Tapia, 328 F.3d 1114, 1121 (9th Cir. 2003)
14 (en banc) (“the district judge must review the magistrate judge’s findings and recommendations
15 de novo if objection is made, but not otherwise” (emphasis in original)).
16
I THEREFORE ORDER that Magistrate Judge Koppe’s report and recommendation
17 (ECF No. 27) is accepted, plaintiff Sonia Gonzalez’s motion to remand (ECF No. 19) is
18 DENIED, and defendant Andrew Saul’s motion to affirm (ECF No. 21) is GRANTED. The
19 clerk of court is instructed to enter judgment accordingly and close this case.
20
DATED this 4th day of December, 2019.
21
22
23
ANDREW P. GORDON
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
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?