Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

Teresa Guardado Nunez v. Michael J. Astrue

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA


March 9, 2012

TERESA GUARDADO NUNEZ,
PLAINTIFF,
v.
MICHAEL J. ASTRUE, COMMISSIONER OF SOCIAL SECURITY,
DEFENDANTS.

The opinion of the court was delivered by: Hon. Anthony J. Battaglia U.S. District Judge

ORDER: (1) ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION; (2) ) DENYING PLAINTIFF'S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT; AND (3) GRANTING DEFENDANT'S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT [Doc. No. 15]

Presently before the Court are Plaintiff Teresa Guardado Nunez's Motion for Summary Judgment, Defendant Michael J. Astrue's Cross-Motion for Summary Judgment, and Magistrate Judge William McCurine's Report and Recommendation advising the Court to deny Plaintiff's motion for summary judgment and to grant Defendants' cross-motion for summary judgment.

Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 72(b) and 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1) set forth a district judge's duties in connection with a magistrate judge's report and recommendation. The district judge must "make a de novo determination of those portions of the report to which objection is made," and "may accept, reject, or modify, in whole or in part, the finding or recommendations made by the magistrate judge." 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1); see also United States v. Remsing, 874 F.2d 614, 617 (9th Cir. 1989). However, in the absence of timely objection(s), the Court "need only satisfy itself that there is no clear error on the face of the record in order to accept the recommendation." Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b), Advisory Committee Notes (1983); see also United States v. Reyna-Tapia, 328 F.3d 1114, 1121 (9th Cir. 2003).

Neither party has timely filed objections to Magistrate Judge McCurine's Report and Recommendation. (See R&R, Doc. No. 15, p. 11 (objections due by February 24, 2012).) Having reviewed the report and recommendation, the Court finds it is thorough, well reasoned, and contains no clear error. Accordingly, the Court hereby: (1) ADOPTS Magistrate Judge McCurine's Report and Recommendation; (2) DENIES Plaintiff's Motion for Summary Judgment; and (3) GRANTS Defendant's Cross-Motion for Summary Judgment.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

20120309

© 1992-2012 VersusLaw Inc.



Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.