(SS) Riddle v. Commissioner of Social Security ( 2024 )

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 JENNIFER MARY RIDDLE, Case No. 1:23-cv-00865-KJM-JDP (SS) 12 Plaintiff, 13 v. ORDER 14 MARTIN O’MALLEY, Commissioner of Social Security, 15 Defendant. 16 17 18 On August 15, 2024, the magistrate judge filed findings and recommendations, which 19 were served on the parties, and which contained notice that any objections to the findings and 20 recommendations were to be filed within fourteen days. Neither party has filed objections. 21 The court presumes that any findings of fact are correct. See Orand v. United States, 22 602 F.2d 207, 208 (9th Cir. 1979). The magistrate judge’s conclusions of law are reviewed 23 de novo. See Robbins v. Carey, 481 F.3d 1143, 1147 (9th Cir. 2007) (“[D]eterminations of law 24 by the magistrate judge are reviewed de novo by both the district court and [the appellate] 25 court[.]”). Having reviewed the file, the court finds the findings and recommendations to be 26 supported by the record and by the proper analysis. 27 ///// 28 ///// ] Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that: 2 1. The Findings and Recommendations filed August 15, 2024, are adopted; 3 2. Plaintiffs motion for summary judgment, ECF No. 13, is granted; 4 3. The Commissioner’s cross-motion for summary judgment, ECF No. 16, is denied; 5 4. The matter is remanded for further proceedings; and 6 5. The Clerk of Court is directed to enter judgment in plaintiffs favor. 7 || DATED: October 11, 2024. 9 = 7 M/Z STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 10 1] 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28