From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Oliver v. Berryhill

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF OREGON
Feb 21, 2017
No. 3:13-cv-00449-SU (D. Or. Feb. 21, 2017)

Opinion

No. 3:13-cv-00449-SU

02-21-2017

DALE OLIVER, Plaintiff, v. NANCY A. BERRYHILL, Acting Commissioner of Social Security, Defendant.


ORDER :

Magistrate Judge Sullivan issued a Findings and Recommendation [24] on January 10, 2017, in which she recommends that this Court grant Plaintiff's Unopposed Motion for Attorney Fees Under 42 U.S.C. § 406(b). The matter is now before the Court pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) and Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 72(b).

Because no objections to the Magistrate Judge's Findings and Recommendation were timely filed, the Court is relieved of its obligation to review the record de novo. United States v. Reyna-Tapia, 328 F.3d 1114, 1121 (9th Cir. 2003) (en banc); see also United States v. Bernhardt, 840 F.2d 1441, 1444 (9th Cir. 1988) (de novo review required only for portions of Magistrate Judge's report to which objections have been made). Having reviewed the legal principles de novo, the Court finds no error.

CONCLUSION

The Court ADOPTS Magistrate Judge Sullivan's Findings & Recommendation [24], and therefore, Plaintiff's Motion for Attorney Fees [23] is granted.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

DATED this 21 day of February, 2017.

/s/_________

MARCO A. HERNÁNDEZ

United States District Judge


Summaries of

Oliver v. Berryhill

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF OREGON
Feb 21, 2017
No. 3:13-cv-00449-SU (D. Or. Feb. 21, 2017)
Case details for

Oliver v. Berryhill

Case Details

Full title:DALE OLIVER, Plaintiff, v. NANCY A. BERRYHILL, Acting Commissioner of…

Court:UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF OREGON

Date published: Feb 21, 2017

Citations

No. 3:13-cv-00449-SU (D. Or. Feb. 21, 2017)