From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Green v. Kijakazi

United States District Court, Central District of California
Feb 17, 2022
2:21-cv-02959-DSF-PVC (C.D. Cal. Feb. 17, 2022)

Opinion

2:21-cv-02959-DSF-PVC

02-17-2022

DARRYL HENRY GREEN, Plaintiff, v. KILOLO KIJAKAZI, Acting Commissioner of Social Security, Defendant.


JUDGMENT

HON. PEDRO V. CASTILLO, UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

The Court having approved the parties' stipulation to remand this case pursuant to Sentence 4 of 42 U.S.C. § 405(g) for further proceedings consistent with that stipulation and for entry of judgment for Plaintiff, judgment is hereby entered for Plaintiff.

In Bastidas v. Chappell, 791 F.3d 1155 (9th Cir. 2015), the Ninth Circuit held that the magistrate judge had the authority to grant Petitioner's request to dismiss two unexhausted claims in his habeas petition without the approval of a district judge, as the magistrate judge's order was simply “doing what [the] habeas petitioner has asked.” Id. at 1165. While Bastidas is not entirely on point, the stipulation for remand and entry of judgment here is jointly made by the parties, without any compulsion from the magistrate judge. Because there appears to be no danger of undue prejudice to any party, the Court grants the request.


Summaries of

Green v. Kijakazi

United States District Court, Central District of California
Feb 17, 2022
2:21-cv-02959-DSF-PVC (C.D. Cal. Feb. 17, 2022)
Case details for

Green v. Kijakazi

Case Details

Full title:DARRYL HENRY GREEN, Plaintiff, v. KILOLO KIJAKAZI, Acting Commissioner of…

Court:United States District Court, Central District of California

Date published: Feb 17, 2022

Citations

2:21-cv-02959-DSF-PVC (C.D. Cal. Feb. 17, 2022)