(SS) Mills v. Commissioner of Social Security, No. 2:2017cv00367 - Document 19 (E.D. Cal. 2017)

Court Description: ORDER signed by District Judge John A. Mendez on 12/19/17 ORDERING that the findings and recommendations (ECF No. 17 ) are ADOPTED; Plaintiff's motion for summary judgment (ECF No. 12 ) is DENIED; the Commissioner's cross-motion for summary judgment (ECF No. 13 ) is GRANTED; the final decision of the Commissioner is AFFIRMED, and judgment is entered for the Commissioner. CASE CLOSED.(Becknal, R)

Download PDF
(SS) Mills v. Commissioner of Social Security Doc. 19 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 CAROL MILLS, 12 13 14 15 16 No. 2:17-cv-00367-JAM-KJN Plaintiff, v. ORDER COMMISSIONER OF SOCIAL SECURITY, Defendant. 17 18 On November 8, 2017, the magistrate judge filed findings and recommendations (ECF 19 No. 17), which were served on the parties and which contained notice that any objections to the 20 findings and recommendations were to be filed within fourteen (14) days. On November 21, 21 2017, plaintiff filed objections to the findings and recommendations (ECF No. 18), which have 22 been considered by the court. 23 This court reviews de novo those portions of the proposed findings of fact to which an 24 objection has been made. 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1); McDonnell Douglas Corp. v. Commodore 25 Business Machines, 656 F.2d 1309, 1313 (9th Cir. 1981); see also Dawson v. Marshall, 561 F.3d 26 930, 932 (9th Cir. 2009). As to any portion of the proposed findings of fact to which no objection 27 has been made, the court assumes its correctness and decides the matter on the applicable law. 28 See Orand v. United States, 602 F.2d 207, 208 (9th Cir. 1979). The magistrate judge’s 1 Dockets.Justia.com 1 conclusions of law are reviewed de novo. See Britt v. Simi Valley Unified School Dist., 708 F.2d 2 452, 454 (9th Cir. 1983). 3 The court has reviewed the applicable legal standards and, good cause appearing, 4 concludes that it is appropriate to adopt the findings and recommendations in full. Accordingly, 5 IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that: 6 1. The findings and recommendations (ECF No. 17) are ADOPTED. 7 2. Plaintiff’s motion for summary judgment (ECF No. 12) is DENIED. 8 3. The Commissioner’s cross-motion for summary judgment (ECF No. 13) is 9 10 11 12 13 GRANTED. 4. The final decision of the Commissioner is AFFIRMED, and judgment is entered for the Commissioner. 5. The Clerk of Court shall close this case. DATED: 12/19/2017 14 /s/ John A. Mendez_______________________ 15 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT JUDGE 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 2

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.