1 2 3 4 5 6 7 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 8 EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 9 10 RONALD DIXON, Case No. 2:24-cv-03252-TLN-CSK 11 Plaintiff, 12 v. ORDER 13 COMMISSIONER OF SOCIAL SECURITY, 14 Defendant. 15

16 17 On August 27, 2025, the magistrate judge filed findings and recommendations (ECF No. 18 16), which were served on the parties and which contained notice that any objections to the 19 findings and recommendations were to be filed within fourteen (14) days. (ECF No. 16). No 20 objections were filed and the time to do so has passed. 21 The Court presumes that any findings of fact are correct. See Orand v. United States, 602

, 208 (9th Cir. 1979). The magistrate judge’s conclusions of law are reviewed de novo. 23 Robbins v. Carey,

(9th Cir. 2007). In accordance with

636(b)(1)(C), this Court has reviewed the file and finds the findings and recommendations are 25 supported by the record and by proper analysis. 26 Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that: 27 1. The findings and recommendations (ECF No. 16) are adopted in full; 28 2. Plaintiff’s motion for summary judgment (ECF No. 12) is GRANTED; 1 3. The Commissioner’s cross-motion (ECF No. 14) is DENIED; 2 4. The Clerk of the Court shall enter judgment for Plaintiff; and 3 5. This matter is remanded for further administrative proceedings consistent with this 4 | order. 5 IT IS SO ORDERED. 6 | DATE: September 30, 2025 7, 7 TROY L. NUNLEY CHIEF UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28