(SS) Dubord v. Commissioner of Social Security ( 2021 )

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 RUDOLPH ANTHONY DUBORD, IV, No. 2:20-cv-634-KJM-KJN 12 Plaintiff, ORDER 13 v. (ECF Nos. 22, 27, 33.) 14 COMMISSIONER OF SOCIAL SECURITY, 15 Defendant. 16 17 On June 29, 2021 the magistrate judge filed amended findings and recommendations 18 (ECF No. 33), which were served on the parties. The parties filed objections to the original 19 findings and recommendations (ECF Nos. 30-31) and the court has considered them. Further, the 20 magistrate judge instructed the parties to notify the court if either had additional objections to the 21 June 29 findings and recommendations (see ECF No. 33 at 19), no party filed objections. 22 The court presumes that any findings of fact are correct. See Orand v. United States, 23 602 F.2d 207, 208 (9th Cir. 1979). The magistrate judge’s conclusions of law are reviewed 24 de novo. See Robbins v. Carey, 481 F.3d 1143, 1147 (9th Cir. 2007) (“[D]eterminations of law 25 by the magistrate judge are reviewed de novo by both the district court and [the appellate] court 26 . . . .”). Having reviewed the file, the court finds the findings and recommendations to be 27 supported by the record and by the proper analysis. 28 ///// ] Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that: 2 1. The amended findings and recommendations (ECF No. 33) are ADOPTED IN FULL; 3 2. Plaintiff's motion for summary judgment (ECF No. 22) is DENIED; 4 3. The Commissioner’s cross-motion (ECF No. 27) is GRANTED; 5 4. The final decision of the Commissioner is AFFIRMED; and 6 5. The Clerk of Court is directed to issue judgment in the Commissioner’s favor and 7 CLOSE this case. 8 | DATED: September 21, 2021. 9 10 ( ti / ¢ q_/ CHIEF NT] ED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28