(SS) Davis v. Commissioner of Social Security ( 2020 )

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 TERESA DIANE DAVIS, No. 2:18-cv-2415-WBS-KJN 12 Plaintiff, ORDER 13 v. (ECF Nos. 28, 30.) 14 COMMISSIONER OF SOCIAL SECURITY, 15 Defendant. 16 17 On August 10, 2020 the magistrate judge filed findings and recommendations (ECF No. 18 30), which were served on the parties and which contained notice that any objections to the 19 findings and recommendations were to be filed within fourteen (14) days. On August 24, 2020 20 plaintiff filed objections to the findings and recommendations, and on August 31, 2020, the 21 Commissioner filed a reply. (ECF Nos. 31, 32.) This court reviews de novo those portions of the 22 proposed findings of fact to which an objection has been made. 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1); 23 McDonnell Douglas Corp. v. Commodore Business Machines, 656 F.2d 1309, 1313 (9th Cir. 24 1981); see also Dawson v. Marshall, 561 F.3d 930, 932 (9th Cir. 2009). As to any portion of the 25 proposed findings of fact to which no objection has been made, the court assumes its correctness 26 and decides the matter on the applicable law. See Orand v. United States, 602 F.2d 207, 208 (9th 27 Cir. 1979). The magistrate judge’s conclusions of law are reviewed de novo. See Britt v. Simi 28 Valley Unified School Dist., 708 F.2d 452, 454 (9th Cir. 1983). wAIS 2 VETTES VV DOING IN RAVI OO VOrOtiey TF OAyt ove 1 The court has reviewed the applicable legal standards and, good cause appearing, 2 | concludes that it is appropriate to adopt the findings and recommendations in full. Accordingly, 3 | ITIS HEREBY ORDERED that: 4 1. The findings and recommendations (ECF No. 30) are ADOPTED IN FULL; and 5 2. Plaintiff's motion for attorney’s fees under the EAJA (ECF No. 28) is DENIED. 6 Dated: August 28, 2020 /, . LZ . 2 / 7 th tan Vin oh g UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28