Heggstrom v. Commissioner of Social Security

Filing 20

ORDER ACCEPTING AND ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION OF MAGISTRATE JUDGE WILLIAM G. COBB. Report and Recommendation ECF No. 18 is accepted and adopted; the case is dismissed without prejudice; Clerk is directed to close this case. Signed by Judge Miranda M. Du on 10/20/2017. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - KW)

1
2
3
4
5
6

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

7

DISTRICT OF NEVADA

8

***

9

DEREK KURT HEGGSTROM,

10
11
12
13
14

Case No. 3:16-cv-00720-MMD-WGC
Plaintiff,

v.
NANCY A. BERRYHILL,
Acting Commissioner of
Social Security,

ORDER ACCEPTING AND ADOPTING
REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION
OF MAGISTRATE JUDGE
WILLIAM G. COBB

Defendant.

15

Before the Court is Magistrate Judge William G. Cobb’s Report and

16

Recommendation (“R&R”) (ECF No. 19). Plaintiff had until October 18, 2017 to object

17

(ECF No. 19). To date, no objection has been filed.

18

This Court “may accept, reject, or modify, in whole or in part, the findings or

19

recommendations made by the magistrate judge.” 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1). Where a party

20

timely objects to a magistrate judge’s report and recommendation, then the court is

21

required to “make a de novo determination of those portions of the [report and

22

recommendation] to which objection is made.” 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1). Where a party fails

23

to object, however, the court is not required to conduct “any review at all . . . of any issue

24

that is not the subject of an objection.” Thomas v. Arn, 474 U.S. 140, 149 (1985). Indeed,

25

the Ninth Circuit has recognized that a district court is not required to review a magistrate

26

judge’s report and recommendation where no objections have been filed. See United

27

States v. Reyna-Tapia, 328 F.3d 1114 (9th Cir. 2003) (disregarding the standard of review

28

employed by the district court when reviewing a report and recommendation to which no

1

objections were made); see also Schmidt v. Johnstone, 263 F. Supp. 2d 1219, 1226 (D.

2

Ariz. 2003) (reading the Ninth Circuit’s decision in Reyna-Tapia as adopting the view that

3

district courts are not required to review “any issue that is not the subject of an objection”).

4

Thus, if there is no objection to a magistrate judge’s recommendation, then the court may

5

accept the recommendation without review. See, e.g., Johnstone, 263 F. Supp. 2d at 1226

6

(accepting, without review, a magistrate judge’s recommendation to which no objection

7

was filed).

8

Nevertheless, this Court finds it appropriate to engage in a de novo review in order

9

to determine whether to adopt the R&R. Upon review of the R&R and the records in this

10

case, the Court finds good cause to adopt the R&R in full.

11

It is hereby ordered that the R&R (ECF No. 18) is accepted and adopted.

12

It is further ordered that the case is dismissed without prejudice.

13

The Clerk is directed to close this case.

14

DATED THIS 20th day of October 2017.

15
16
MIRANDA M. DU
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

2