Case 8:21-cv-00593-JWH-PVC Document 25 Filed 03/02/22 Page 1 of 2 Page ID #:3280

1 2 JS-6 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 NATALIE BALTODANO, Case No. SACV 21-0593 JWH (PVC)

12 Plaintiff,

13 v. JUDGMENT OF REMAND 14 KILOLO KIJAKAZI, Acting Commissioner of Social Security, 15 Defendant. 16 17 18 The Court having approved the parties’ Stipulation to Voluntary Remand Pursuant 19 to Sentence Four of

(g) and to Entry of Judgment (“Stipulation to 20 Remand”), lodged concurrently with the lodging of the within Judgment of Remand, IT IS 21 HEREBY ORDERED, ADJUDGED AND DECREED that the above-captioned action is 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 Case 8-21-cv-00593-JWH-PVC Document 25 Filed 03/02/22 Page 2of2 Page ID #:3281

1 || remanded to the Commissioner of Social Security for further proceedings consistent with 2 |) the Stipulation to Remand. 4 || DATED: March 2, 2022 . ° huh 6 □□ PEDRO V. CASTILLO 7 UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 || | In Bastidas v. Chappell,

(9th Cir. 2015), the Ninth Circuit held that the magistrate judge had the authority to grant Petitioner’s request to dismiss two unexhausted 26 || 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.” □□□ at 1165. 27 || 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. 28 || Because there appears to be no danger of undue prejudice to any party, the Court grants the request.