Keyser v. Commissioner of Social Security
Filing
21
ORDER - As no party has made objections, this Court follows the recommendation of the Advisory Committee and reviews Judge Beckerman's Findings and Recommendation for clear error on the face of the record. No such error is apparent. Acco rdingly, the Court ADOPTS Judge Beckerman's Findings and Recommendation, Dkt. 19 . The Commissioner's decision is REVERSED and REMANDED, pursuant to sentence four of 42 U.S.C. § 405(g), for further proceedings not inconsistent with Judge Beckerman's opinion. Signed on 3/23/2015 by Judge Michael H. Simon. (mja)
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF OREGON
PAMELA KEYSER,
Plaintiff,
Case No. 6:13-cv-2031-SB
ORDER
v.
CAROLYN W. COLVIN,
Commissioner of Social Security,
Defendant.
Michael H. Simon, District Judge.
United States Magistrate Judge Stacie F. Beckerman issued a Findings and
Recommendation in this case on March 2, 2015. Dkt. 19. Judge Beckerman recommended that
the Commissioner’s decision be reversed and remanded for further proceedings. No party has
filed objections.
Under the Federal Magistrates Act (“Act”), the court may “accept, reject, or modify, in
whole or in part, the findings or recommendations made by the magistrate.” 28 U.S.C.
§ 636(b)(1)(C). If a party files objections to a magistrate’s findings and recommendations, “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.; Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b)(3).
PAGE 1 – ORDER
If no party objects, however, the Act does not prescribe any standard of review. See
Thomas v. Arn, 474 U.S. 140, 152 (1985) (“There is no indication that Congress, in enacting [the
Act], intended to require a district judge to review a magistrate’s report to which no objections
are filed.”). Nor does the Act “preclude further review by the district judge[] sua sponte . . .
under a de novo or any other standard.” Thomas, 474 U.S. at 154. And the Advisory Committee
Notes to Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b) recommend that “[w]hen no timely objection is filed,” the court
review the magistrate’s findings and recommendations for “clear error on the face of the record.”
As no party has made objections, this Court follows the recommendation of the Advisory
Committee and reviews Judge Beckerman’s Findings and Recommendation for clear error on the
face of the record. No such error is apparent. Accordingly, the Court ADOPTS Judge
Beckerman’s Findings and Recommendation, Dkt. 19. The Commissioner’s decision is
REVERSED and REMANDED, pursuant to sentence four of 42 U.S.C. § 405(g), for further
proceedings not inconsistent with Judge Beckerman’s opinion.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
DATED this 23d day of March, 2015.
/s/ Michael H. Simon
Michael H. Simon
United States District Judge
PAGE 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?