United States District Court, D. Oregon, Portland Division
April 15, 2015
SANDRA L. DELANEY, Plaintiff,
COMMISSIONER of the SOCIAL SECURITY ADMINISTRATION, Defendant.
OPINION AND ORDER
MICHAEL W. MOSMAN, District Judge.
On March 23, 2015, Magistrate Judge Acosta issued his Findings and Recommendation (F&R) , finding that the decision of the Commissioner of Social Security is supported by substantial evidence in the record and recommending that the ALJ's decision should be affirmed and this action should be dismissed. No objections to the Findings and Recommendation were filed.
The magistrate judge makes only recommendations to the court, to which any party may file written objections. The court is not bound by the recommendations of the magistrate judge, but retains responsibility for making the final determination. The court is generally required to make a de novo determination regarding those portions of the report or specified findings or recommendation as to which an objection is made. 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C). However, the court is not required to review, de novo or under any other standard, the factual or legal conclusions of the magistrate judge as to those portions of the F&R to which no objections are addressed. See Thomas v. Arn, 474 U.S. 140, 149 (1985); United States v. Reyna-Tapia, 328 F.3d 1114, 1121 (9th Cir. 2003). While the level of scrutiny under which I am required to review the F&R depends on whether or not objections have been filed, in either case, I am free to accept, reject, or modify any part of the F&R. 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C).
Upon review, I agree with Judge Acosta's recommendation and I ADOPT the F&R  as my own opinion.
IT IS SO ORDERED.