Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-casd-3_12-cv-01810/USCOURTS-casd-3_12-cv-01810-1/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

SHAWN ALAN GILLICK,

Plaintiff,

CASE NO. 12CV1810-LAB (PCL)

ORDER ADOPTING REPORT

AND RECOMMENDATION; AND

ORDER OF DISMISSAL

vs.

COMMISSIONER OF SOCIAL

SECURITY,

Defendant.

This social security appeal was referred to Magistrate Judge Peter Lewis for report

and recommendation, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636. Judge Lewis issued his report and

recommendation (the “R&R”) on cross motions for summary judgment, recommending that

Plaintiff Shawn Alan Gillick’s motion be denied and the motion of Defendant, the

Commissioner of Social Security, be granted.

Objections to the R&R were initially due on September 4, 2013, but the Court granted

a joint motion extending the deadline to September 18. The order extending the deadline

reminded the parties to file promptly, and cautioned them that additional extensions of time

would not be granted without a showing of extraordinary good cause. Since then, Gillick has

not filed objections, nor sought additional time in which to do so.

A district court has jurisdiction to review a Magistrate Judge's report and

recommendation on dispositive matters. Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b). "The district judge must

- 1 - 12CV1810

Case 3:12-cv-01810-LAB-PCL Document 21 Filed 09/19/13 Page 1 of 2
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

determine de novo any part of the magistrate judge's disposition that has been properly

objected to." Id. "A judge of the court may accept, reject, or modify, in whole or in part, the

findings or recommendations made by the magistrate judge." 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1). This

section does not require some lesser review by the district court when no objections are filed. 

Thomas v. Arn, 474 U.S. 140, 149-50 (1985). The "statute makes it clear that the district

judge must review the magistrate judge's findings and recommendations de novo if objection

is made, but not otherwise." United States v. Reyna-Tapia, 328 F.3d 1114, 1121 (9th Cir.

2003) (en banc).

The Court has nonetheless reviewed the R&R and agrees with its rationale and

conclusions. The R&R is ADOPTED, Plaintiff’s motion for summary judgment is DENIED,

and Defendant’s motion for summary judgment is GRANTED. The complaint is therefore

DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

DATED: September 19, 2013

HONORABLE LARRY ALAN BURNS

United States District Judge

- 2 - 12CV1810

Case 3:12-cv-01810-LAB-PCL Document 21 Filed 09/19/13 Page 2 of 2