Westphal v. Commissioner Social Security Administration
Filing
21
ORDER - The Court ADOPTS Magistrate Judge Acosta's Findings andRecommendation (#19). Accordingly, the Court REVERSES thedecision of the Commissioner and REMANDS this matter pursuant tosentence four of 42 U.S.C. § 405(g) for the immediate calculationand award of benefits. IT IS SO ORDERED. DATED this 25th day of January, 2017, by United States District Judge Anna J. Brown. (peg)
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF OREGON
CANDY WESTPHAL,
3:15-cv-01904-AC
Plaintiff,
ORDER
v.
CAROLYN W. COLVIN,
Conunissioner, Social Security
Administration,
Defendant.
BROWN, Judge.
Magistrate Judge John V. Acosta issued Findings and
Recommendation (#19) on December 27, 2016, in which he recommends
this Court reverse and remand the Commissioner's decision denying
Plaintiff's application for supplemental security income benefits
and disability insurance benefits for the immediate calculation
and award of benefits.
The matter is now before this Court
pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b) (1) (B) and Federal Rule of Civil
Procedure 72(b).
1
ORDER
Because no objections to the Magistrate Judge's Findings and
Recommendation were timely filed, this Court is relieved of its
obligation to review the record de novo.
561 F.3d 930, 932 (9th Cir. 2009)
Reyna-Tapia,
See Dawson v. Marshall,
See also United States v.
328 F.3d 1114, 1121 (9th Cir. 2003) (en bane).
Having reviewed the legal principles de novo, the Court does not
find any error.
CONCLUSION
The Court ADOPTS Magistrate Judge Acosta's Findings and
Recommendation (#19).
Accordingly, the Court REVERSES the
decision of the Commissioner and REMANDS this matter pursuant to
sentence four of 42 U.S.C.
§
405(g) for the immediate calculation
and award of benefits.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
DATED this
;.c;""" day
of January, 2017.
ANNA~
United States District Judge
2
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?