1 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 2 DISTRICT OF NEVADA SENECA DURR, Case No.: 2:18-cv-01907-APG-NJK 4 Plaintiff Order (1) Accepting Report and Recommendation, (2) Denying Motion to SH v. Affirm, and (3) Granting Motion to Remand 6]/ ANDREW SAUL, [ECF Nos. 14, 24, 30] 7 Defendant 8 On January 24, 2020, Magistrate Judge Koppe recommended that I grant plaintiff Seneca 9}| Durr’s motion to remand and deny the defendant’s motion to affirm. ECF No. 30. No party 10}| objected. Thus, I am not obligated to conduct a de novo review of the report and recommendation.

(b)(1) (requiring district courts to “make a de novo determination of those portions of the report or specified proposed findings to which objection is made”); United States v. Reyna-Tapia,

(9th Cir. 2003) (en banc) (“the district judge must review the magistrate judge’s findings and recommendations de novo if 15}| objection is made, but not otherwise” (emphasis in original)). 16 I THEREFORE ORDER that Magistrate Judge Koppe’s report and recommendation 17|| (ECF No. 30) is accepted, defendant Andrew Saul’s motion to affirm (ECF No. 24) is DENIED, and plaintiff Seneca Durr’s motion to remand (ECF No. 14) is GRANTED. This matter is remanded to the Social Security Administration for further proceedings consistent with this order and with Judge Koppe’s report and recommendation. 21 DATED this 10th day of February, 2020. 22 ~<a ANDREW P. GORDON UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE