Hearth v. Commissioner Social Security Administration ( 2021 )

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF OREGON BEVERLY K. H.,1 Case No. 3:20-cv-00158-AC Plaintiff, ORDER v. COMMISSIONER OF SOCIAL SECURITY, Defendant. IMMERGUT, District Judge. On November 15, 2021, Magistrate Judge John V. Acosta issued his Findings and Recommendations (“F&R”), ECF 28. The F&R recommends that this Court affirm the decision of the Commissioner of Social Security. No party filed objections. STANDARDS Under the Federal Magistrates Act (“Act”), as amended, the court may “accept, reject, or modify, in whole or in part, the findings or recommendations made by the magistrate judge.” 1 In the interest of privacy, this Order uses only the first name and the initial of the last name of the non-governmental party in this case. 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1). If a party objects to a magistrate judge’s F&R, “the court shall make a de novo determination of those portions of the report or specified proposed findings or recommendations to which objection is made.” Id. But the court is not required to review, de novo or under any other standard, the factual or legal conclusions of the F&R to which no objections are addressed. See Thomas v. Arn, 474 U.S. 140, 149–50 (1985); United States v. Reyna-Tapia, 328 F.3d 1114, 1121 (9th Cir. 2003) (en banc). Nevertheless, the Act “does not preclude further review by the district judge, sua sponte” whether de novo or under another standard. Thomas, 474 U.S. at 154. No party having filed objections, this Court has reviewed the F&R and accepts Judge Acosta’s conclusions. The F&R, ECF 28, is adopted in full. The Commissioner’s decision that Plaintiff was not disabled is AFFIRMED. IT IS SO ORDERED. DATED this 15th day of December, 2021. /s/ Karin J. Immergut Karin J. Immergut United States District Judge