Bray v. Commissioner Social Security Administration ( 2019 )

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF OREGON EUGENE DIVISION STARLYN B.,1 Case No. 6:17-cv-01897-SU Plaintiff, ORDER v. COMMISSIONER, Social Security Administration, Defendant. HERNÁNDEZ, District Judge: Magistrate Judge Sullivan issued a Findings and Recommendation [15] on March 22, 2019, in which she recommends the Court affirm the Commissioner’s decision to deny Plaintiff’s application for benefits. The matter is now before the Court pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1) and Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 72(b). 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 or parties in this case. When any party objects to any portion of the Magistrate Judge’s Findings and Recommendation, the district court must make a de novo determination of that portion of the Magistrate Judge’s report. 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1); Dawson v. Marshall, 561 F.3d 930, 932 (9th Cir. 2009); United States v. Reyna-Tapia, 328 F.3d 1114, 1121 (9th Cir. 2003) (en banc). The Court has carefully considered Plaintiff’s objections and concludes that the objections do not provide a basis to modify the recommendation. The Court has also reviewed the pertinent portions of the record de novo and finds no error in the Magistrate Judge’s Findings and Recommendation. CONCLUSION The Court adopts Magistrate Judge Sullivan’s Findings and Recommendation [15]. Therefore, the decision of the Commissioner is affirmed, and this case is dismissed. IT IS SO ORDERED. DATED nic) day of SEI pr , 2019. Near U0 dened, MARCO A. HERNANDEZ United States District Judge 2 - ORDER