Smith v. Colvin
Filing
19
ORDER adopting and accepting 18 Report and Recommendation; denying 9 Motion for Remand and/or Reversal; and granting 12 Cross-Motion to Affirm. Signed by Judge Larry R. Hicks on 3/11/16. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - JC)
1
2
3
4
5
6
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
7
DISTRICT OF NEVADA
8
9
***
Case No. 3:15-cv-00218-LRH-(VPC)
Plaintiff,
ORDER
SHELLY J. SMITH,
10
v.
11
12
CAROLYN W. COLVIN, Acting
Commissioner of Social Security,
13
Defendant.
14
15
Before this Court is the Report and Recommendation of U.S. Magistrate Judge
16
Valerie P. Cooke (ECF No. 18) entered on February 18, 2016, recommending denying
17
Plaintiff’s Motion for Remand and/or Reversal (ECF No. 9) entered on August 20, 2015,
18
and granting Defendant’s Cross-Motion to Affirm (ECF No. 12) entered on October 14,
19
2015. No objection to the Report and Recommendation has been filed. The action was
20
referred to the Magistrate Judge pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) and Local Rule
21
1B 1-4 of the Rules of Practice of the United States District Court for the District of
22
Nevada.
23
The Court has conducted its de novo review in this case, has fully considered the
24
pleadings and memoranda of the parties and other relevant matters of record pursuant
25
to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) and Local Rule IB 3-2. The Court determines that the
26
Magistrate Judge’s Report and Recommendation (ECF No. 18) entered on February 18,
27
2016, should be adopted and accepted.
28
///
1
1
IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that the Magistrate Judge’s Report and
2
Recommendation (ECF No. 18) entered on February 18, 2016, is adopted and
3
accepted, and Plaintiff’s Motion for Remand and/or Reversal (ECF No. 9) is DENIED.
4
5
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Defendant’s Cross-Motion to Affirm (ECF No.
12) is GRANTED.
6
IT IS SO ORDERED.
7
DATED this 11th day of March, 2016.
8
9
LARRY R. HICKS
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
2
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?