Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-casd-3_12-cv-02673/USCOURTS-casd-3_12-cv-02673-1/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 864
Nature of Suit: Social Security - SSID Title XVI
Cause of Action: 42:405 Review of HHS Decision (SSID)

---

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

CAROL A. COOPER,

Plaintiff,

v.

CAROLYN W. COLVIN, Acting

Commissioner of Social Security,

Defendant.

 

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

Civil Case No. 12cv2673 AJB (DHB)

ORDER:

(1) ADOPTING REPORT AND

RECOMMENDATION, (Doc. No.

18);

(2) GRANTING PLAINTIFF’S

MOTION FOR SUMMARY

JUDGMENT, (Doc. No. 11);

(3) DENYING DEFENDANT’S

CROSS-MOTION FOR SUMMARY

JUDGMENT, (Doc. No. 15); AND

(4) REMANDING FOR FURTHER 

PROCEEDINGS.

On November 2, 2012, Plaintiff Carol A. Cooper (“Plaintiff”) filed a complaint

pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 405(g), requesting judicial review of an adverse final decision

issued by the Commissioner of Social Security (“Defendant”). (Doc. No. 1.) On April 2,

2013, Plaintiff filed a motion for summary judgment, (Doc. No. 11), and on May 14,

2013, Defendant filed a cross-motion for summary judgment, (Doc. Nos. 15, 16). 

Plaintiff did not file an opposition to Defendant’s cross-motion for summary judgment or

a reply to Defendant’s opposition. 

1 12cv2673 AJB (DHB)

Case 3:12-cv-02673-AJB-DHB Document 19 Filed 01/07/14 Page 1 of 3
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

On December 5, 2013, United States Magistrate Judge David H. Bartick issued a

Report and Recommendation (“R&R”), recommending that the Court grant Plaintiff’s

motion for summary judgment, deny Defendant’s cross-motion for summary judgment,

and remand for further administrative proceedings. (Doc. No. 18 at 29:2-5.) The R&R

also instructed the parties that any written objections to the R&R must be filed no later

than January 6, 2013, and that failure to file timely objections could waive any right to

raise those contentions on appeal. (Id. at 29:9-16.) See Martinez v. Ylst, 951 F.2d 1153

(9th Cir. 1991). As of the date of this order, neither party has filed an objection to the

R&R or requested additional time to file objections. 

A district judge’s duties concerning a report and recommendation and objections

thereto are set forth in Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 72(b) and 28 U .S.C. § 636(b)(1). 

Pursuant to Section 636(b)(1)(C), a district judge must “make a de novo determination of

those portions of the report or specified proposed findings or recommendations to which

objection is made” and “may accept, reject, or modify, in whole or in part, the findings or

recommendations made by the magistrate judge.” See also United States v. Remsing, 874

F.2d 614, 617 (9th Cir. 1989). However, under Rule 72(b), 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).

Here, despite being represented by counsel, neither Plaintiff nor Defendant filed

timely objections to the R&R. Therefore, having reviewed the R&R the Court finds the

report thorough, well-reasoned, and contains no clear error. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b);

Reyna-Tapia, 328 F.3d at 1121. Accordingly, the Court ADOPTS the R&R in its

entirety, (Doc. No. 18), GRANTS Plaintiff’s motion for summary judgment, (Doc. No.

11), DENIES Defendant’s cross-motion for summary judgment, (Doc. No. 15), and

REMANDS the case to the Social Security Administration for further administrative

2 12cv2673 AJB (DHB)

Case 3:12-cv-02673-AJB-DHB Document 19 Filed 01/07/14 Page 2 of 3
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

proceedings consistent with the R&R, (Doc. No. 18 at 28:7-21). The Clerk of Court is

instructed to remand and close the case. 

IT IS SO ORDERED.

DATED: January 7, 2014

Hon. Anthony J. Battaglia

U.S. District Judge

3 12cv2673 AJB (DHB)

Case 3:12-cv-02673-AJB-DHB Document 19 Filed 01/07/14 Page 3 of 3