Rowland v. Commissioner Social Security Administration
Filing
25
OPINION AND ORDER: Upon review, I agree with Judge Hubels recommendation, and I ADOPT the F&R 23 as my own opinion. Signed on 9/25/13 by Judge Michael W. Mosman. (dls)
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF OREGON
PORTLAND DIVISION
JENNIFER ROWLAND,
No. 3:12-cv-00549-HU
Plaintiff,
OPINION AND ORDER
v.
CAROLYN W. COLVIN, Acting
Commissioner of Social Security,
Defendants.
MOSMAN, J.,
On September 3, 2013, Magistrate Judge Hubel issued his Findings and Recommendation
(“F&R”) [23] in the above-captioned case, recommending that the Commissioner’s final decision
be affirmed and that this action be dismissed with prejudice. There were no objections.
DISCUSSION
The magistrate judge makes only recommendations to the court, to which any party may
file written objections. I am not bound by the recommendations of the magistrate judge; instead,
I retain responsibility for making the final determination. I am required to review de novo those
portions of the report or any specified findings or recommendations within it as to which an
objection is made. 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1). However, I am not required to review, de novo or
1 – OPINION AND ORDER
under any other standard, the factual or legal conclusions of the magistrate judge as to those
portions of the F&R to which no party has objected. See Thomas v. Arn, 474 U.S. 140, 149
(1985); United States v. Reyna-Tapia, 328 F.3d 1114, 1121 (9th Cir. 2003). While the level of
scrutiny I am required to apply to the F&R depends on whether objections have been filed, in
either case I am free to accept, reject, or modify any part of the F&R. 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1).
Upon review, I agree with Judge Hubel’s recommendation, and I ADOPT the F&R [23]
as my own opinion.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated this
25th
day of September, 2013.
/s/ Michael W. Mosman ___
MICHAEL W. MOSMAN
United States District Judge
2 – OPINION AND ORDER
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?