Miller v. Commissioner, Social Security Administration, No. 3:2009cv01526 - Document 36 (D. Or. 2011)

Court Description: OPINION AND ORDER. Signed on 08/29/2011 by Judge Malcolm F. Marsh. (pvh)

Download PDF
FlLED31 ALk; '1114:18l1sDc,ORP UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF OREGON PORTLAND DIVISION VERNON W. MILLER, Case No. CV 09-1526 JE Plaintiff, OPINION AND ORDER v. MICHAEL J. ASTRUE, Commissioner of Social Security Defendant. REDDEN, District Judge: On June 13,2011, Magistrate Judge John Jelderks issued his Findings and Recommendation (doc.29) in the above-captioned case, recommending that the court affirm the decision of the Commissioner, and dismiss this action with prejudice. The matter is now before me pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(l)(B) and Federal Rules of PAGE 1 - OPINION AND ORDER Civil Procedure 72(b) and 54(d)(2)(D). The magistrate judge makes recommendations to the district court, and any party may file written objections to those recommendations. 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1 )(C). When a party timely objects to any portion of the magistrate's Findings and Recommendation, the district court must conduct a de novo review of the pOliions of the Findings and, Recommendation to which objections are made. 28 U.S.c. § 636(b)(1)(C); ': ~ McDonnell Douglas Corn. v. Commodore Business Machines, 656 F.2d 1309, 1313 (9th Cir. 1981), cerl. denied, 455 U.S. 920 (1982). The district court may then "accept, reject, the recommended decision, receive futiher evidence, 01' 01' modify recommit the matter to the magistrate with instructions." 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1); Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b). The district court is not required to review de novo the factual and legal conclusions to which the parties do not object. Thomas v. Am, 474 U.S. 140,149 (1985); United States v. Reyna-Tapia, 328 F.3d 1114, 1121 (9th Cir. 2003). Plaintiff filed objections to Magistrate Judge Jelderks's Findings and Recommendation. I have, therefore, given those portions ofthe Findings and Recommendation de novo review. I agree with Magistrate Judge Jelderks's analysis and conclusions. 1/1 1/1 /II /II /II /II PAGE 2- OPINION AND ORDER Plaintiff asserts the same arguments addressed by the Magistrate Judge. Accordingly, I adopt the Findings and Recommendation as my own opinion. I affirm the decision of the Commissioner, and DISMISS this action with prejudice. IT IS SO ORDERED. DATED this:!..t day of August, 2011. ~Af,~r U.S. District Court Judge PAGE 3 - OPINION AND ORDER

Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.