Studebaker v. Commissioner Social Security Administration

Filing 22

ORDER: Upon careful review, I agree with Judge Jelderks's recommendations and ADOPT the F&R 17 as my own opinion. The Commissioner's final decision is REVERSED and this matter is REMANDED for further proceedings consistent with Judge Jelderks's analysis. Signed on 1/24/2018 by Judge Michael W. Mosman. (jtj)

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

TIMOTHY L STUDEBAKER,
No. 6:16-cv-01023-JE
Plaintiff,
OPINION AND ORDER
v.
NANCY A. BERRYHILL,
Acting Commissioner of Social Security,
Defendant.
MOSMAN, J.,
On October 27, 2017, Magistrate Judge John Jelderks issued his Findings and
Recommendation (“F&R”) [17], recommending that the Court REVERSE the final decision of
the Commissioner of Social Security (“Commissioner”) and REMAND this matter for further
proceedings. The Commissioner filed Objections to the F&R [19].
DISCUSSION
The magistrate judge makes only recommendations to the court, to which any party may
file written objections. The court 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 determination regarding those portions of the report or specified findings or
recommendations as to which an objection is made. 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C). However, the
court is not required to review, de novo or under any other standard, the factual or legal
1 – OPINION AND ORDER

conclusions of 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 with 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 careful review, I agree with Judge Jelderks’s recommendations and ADOPT the
F&R [17] as my own opinion. The Commissioner’s final decision is REVERSED and this matter
is REMANDED for further proceedings consistent with Judge Jelderks’s analysis.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
DATED this 24 day of January, 2018.

/s/ Michael W. Mosman
___________________________
MICHAEL W. MOSMAN
Chief United States District Judge

2 – OPINION AND ORDER