Goetz v. SS Disability ( 2020 )

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 TERRY H.G., Case No.: 19cv1603-CAB-RBM 12 Plaintiff, ORDER: (1) ADOPTING REPORT 13 v. AND RECOMMENDATION [Doc. No. 30]; (2) DENYING PLAINTIFF’S 14 SS DISABILITY, “MERITS BRIEF” [Doc. No. 25]; and 15 Defendant. (3) AFFIRMING THE DECISION OF THE ALJ 16 17 18 Pending before the Court is the Report and Recommendation (“R&R”) of 19 Magistrate Judge Ruth Bermudez Montenegro, filed on August 19, 2020, recommending 20 that the Court deny Plaintiff Terry H.G.’s Merits Brief and affirm the decision of the 21 Administrative Law Judge (“ALJ”). [Doc. No. 30.] 22 Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 72(b) and 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1) set forth a district 23 court’s duties in connection with a magistrate judge’s report and recommendation. The 24 district court must “make a de novo determination of those portion of the report to which 25 objection is made,” and “may accept, reject, or modify, in whole or in part, the findings 26 or recommendations made by the magistrate judge.” 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1); see also 27 United States v. Raddatz, 447 U.S. 667, 673-76 (1980); United States v. Remsing, 874 28 1 || F.2d 614, 617 (9th Cir. 1989). However, in the absence of timely objection, the Court 2 || “need only satisfy itself that there is no clear error on the face of the record in order to 3 || accept the recommendation.” Fed.R.Cvi.P. 72 advisory committee’s note (citing 4 || Campbel v. U.S. Dist. Court, 501 F.2d 196, 206 (9th Cir. 1974)); see also United States v. 5 || Reyna-Tapia, 328 F.3d 1114, 1121 (th Cir. 2003)(“[T]he district judge must review the 6 || magistrate judge’s findings and recommendations de novo if objection is made, but not 7 || otherwise.”). 8 Here, neither party has timely filed objections to Magistrate Judge Montenegro’s 9 || R&R. [See Doc. No. 30 at 15 (objections due by September 10, 2020).] Having reviewed 10 || the R&R, the Court finds that it is thorough, well-reasoned, and contains no clear error. 11 || Accordingly, the Court hereby: (1) ADOPTS Magistrate Judge Montenegro’s report and 12 ||recommendation; (2) DENIES Plaintiff’s Merits Brief; and (3) AFFIRMS the decision 13 the ALJ. 14 This Order concludes the litigation in this matter. The Clerk shall close the file. 15 IT IS SO ORDERED. 16 || Dated: September 17, 2020 € 17 Hon. Cathy Ann Bencivengo 18 United States District Judge 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28