Nielsen v. Commissioner Social Security Administration

Filing 27

ORDER: The Court has reviewed the legal issues in the Findings and Recommendation 25 and adopts it in full. The decision of the Commissioner is AFFIRMED and this case is DISMISSED. See attached Order for further details. Signed on 1/2/2021 by Judge Karin J. Immergut. (jy) Modified on 1/4/2021 to correct file date. (gw).

Case 1:17-cv-02020-SB

Document 27

Filed 01/04/21

Page 1 of 2

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF OREGON

STEPHEN N.,1
Plaintiff,

Case No. 1:17-cv-02020-SB
ORDER

v.
COMMISSIONER OF SOCIAL
SECURITY,
Defendant.

IMMERGUT, District Judge.
Plaintiff, Stephen N., seeks review of a final decision of the Commissioner of Social
Security (“Commissioner”) denying his application for Disability Insurance Benefits (“DIB”)
under Title II of the Social Security Act. On December 7, 2020, Magistrate Judge Stacie F.
Beckerman issued her Findings and Recommendation (“F&R”) in this case, recommending that
this Court affirm the Commissioner’s decision and dismiss the case. ECF 25. No party filed
objections.

1

In the interest of privacy, this order uses only the first name and the initial of the last name of
the non-governmental party in this case.
PAGE 1 – ORDER

Case 1:17-cv-02020-SB

Document 27

Filed 01/04/21

Page 2 of 2

DISCUSSION
Under the Federal Magistrates Act (“Act”), as amended, the court may “accept, reject, or
modify, in whole or in part, the findings or recommendations made by the magistrate judge.”
28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1). If a party objects to a magistrate judge’s F&R, “the court shall make a de
novo determination of those portions of the report or specified proposed findings or
recommendations to which objection is made.” Id. But the court is not required to review, de
novo or under any other standard, the factual or legal conclusions of the F&R to which no
objections are addressed. See Thomas v. Arn, 474 U.S. 140, 149–50 (1985); United States v.
Reyna-Tapia, 328 F.3d 1114, 1121 (9th Cir. 2003) (en banc). Nevertheless, the Act “does not
preclude further review by the district judge, sua sponte” whether de novo or under another
standard. Thomas, 474 U.S. at 154.
No party having filed objections, this Court has reviewed the F&R and accepts Judge
Beckerman’s conclusions. The F&R, ECF 25, is adopted in full. The decision of the
Commissioner is AFFIRMED and this case is DISMISSED.

IT IS SO ORDERED.
DATED this 2nd day of January, 2021.
/s/ Karin J. Immergut
Karin J. Immergut
United States District Judge

PAGE 2 – ORDER