Lehman v. Commissioner Social Security Administration

Filing 24

OPINION AND ORDER: Adopting Findings and Recommendation 20 as my own opinion. Signed on 9/29/2017 by Judge Michael W. Mosman. (pg)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF OREGON
PORTLAND DIVISION

GARY DOUGLAS LEHMAN,
No. 6:16-CV-00920-PK
Plaintiff,
OPINION AND ORDER

v.
NANCY A. BERRYHILL,
Acting Commissioner of Social Security,
Defendant.

MOSMAN,J.,
On July 25, 2017, Magistrate Judge Papak issued his Findings and Recommendation
(F&R) [20], recommending the Commissioners' final decision be AFFIRMED. Plaintiff filed
objections [22] and Defendant responded [23].

DISCUSSION
The magistrate judge makes only recommendations to the court, to which any paity may
file written objections. The comt is not bound by the recommendations of the magistrate judge,
but retains responsibility for making the final determination. The court is generally required to
make a de novo dete1mination regarding those portions of the repmt or specified findings or
recommendation as to which an objection is made. 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(l)(C). However, the comt
is not required to review, de novo or under any other standard, the factual or legal conclusions of
1 - OPINION AND ORDER

the magistrate judge as to those portions of the F&R to which no objections are addressed. 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 under which I am required to review the F&R
depends on whether or not 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 )(C).
Upon review, I agree with Judge Papak's recommendation and I ADOPT the F&R [20]
as my own opinion.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
DATED this 2.~ day of September, 2017.

2 - OPINION AND ORDER