Pearce v. Commissioner Social Security Administration

Filing 26

ORDER: The Court ADOPTS Magistrate Judge Acosta's Findings andRecommendation 24 . Accordingly, the Court AFFIRMS thedecision of the Commissioner and DISMISSES this matter pursuantto sentence four of 42 U.S.C. § 405(g). IT IS SO ORDERED. DATED this 25th day of July, 2017, by United States District Judge Anna J. Brown. (peg)

Download PDF
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF OREGON KYLE DEAN PEARCE, Plaintiff, 6:16-cv-00021-AC ORDER v. NANCY A. BERRYHILL, 1 Acting Commissioner, Social Security Administration, Defendant. BROWN, Judge. Magistrate Judge John V. Acosta issued Findings and Recommendation (#24) on July 7, 2017, in which he recommends this Court affirm the Commissioner's decision denying Plaintiff's application for supplemental security income benefits and disability insurance benefits. 1 The matter is now before this On January 23, 2017, Nancy A. Berryhill was appointed the Acting Commissioner of Social Security and pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 25(d) is substituted as the Defendant in this action. 1 ORDER Court pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(l)(B) and Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 72(b). 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). See Dawson v. Marshall, See also United States v. Reyna-Tapia, 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 (#24). Accordingly, the Court AFFIRMS the decision of the Commissioner and DISMISSES this matter pursuant to sentence four of 42 U.S.C. § 405(g). IT IS SO ORDERED. ,,tv-._ DATED this a~ day of July, 2017. ANNA~tf~ 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?