Opinion
Case No. 3:13-cv-01457-ST
10-08-2014
ORDER
United States Magistrate Judge Janice M. Stewart issued a Findings and Recommendation in this case on September 18, 2014. Dkt. 18. Judge Stewart recommended that the Commissioner's decision be reversed and remanded for further proceedings. No party has filed objections.
Under the Federal Magistrates Act ("Act"), the court may "accept, reject, or modify, in whole or in part, the findings or recommendations made by the magistrate." 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C). If a party files objections to a magistrate's findings and recommendations, "the court shall make a de novo determination of those portions of the report or specified proposed findings or recommendations to which objection is made." Id.; Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b)(3).
If no party objects, however, the Act does not prescribe any standard of review. See Thomas v. Arn, 474 U.S. 140, 152 (1985) ("There is no indication that Congress, in enacting [the Act], intended to require a district judge to review a magistrate's report to which no objections are filed."). Nor does the Act "preclude further review by the district judge[] sua sponte . . . under a de novo or any other standard." Thomas, 474 U.S. at 154. And the Advisory Committee Notes to Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b) recommend that "[w]hen no timely objection is filed," the court review the magistrate's findings and recommendations for "clear error on the face of the record."
As no party has made objections, this Court follows the recommendation of the Advisory Committee and reviews Judge Stewart's Findings and Recommendation for clear error on the face of the record. No such error is apparent. Accordingly, the Court ADOPTS Judge Stewart's Findings and Recommendation, Dkt. 18. The Commissioner's decision is REVERSED and REMANDED, pursuant to sentence four of 42 U.S.C. § 405(g), for further proceedings not inconsistent with Judge Stewart's opinion.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
DATED this 8th day of October, 2014.
/s/ Michael H. Simon
Michael H. Simon
United States District Judge