ORDER ACCEPTING REPORT & RECOMMENDATION OF MAGISTRATE JUDGE
RICHARD F. BOULWARE, II., United States District Court Judge
Before the Court for consideration is the Report and Recommendation (ECF No. 4) of the Honorable Carl W. Hoffman, United States Magistrate Judge, entered December 16, 2014.
A district 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). A party may file specific written objections to the findings and recommendations of a magistrate judge. 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1); Local Rule IB 3-2(a). When written objections have been filed, the district court is required to “make a de novo determination of those portions of the report or specified proposed findings or recommendations to which objection is made.” 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1); see also Local Rule IB 3-2(b). Where a party fails to object, however, a district court is not required to conduct “any review, ” de novo or otherwise, of the report and recommendations of a magistrate judge. Thomas v. Arn, 474 U.S. 140, 149 (1985).
Pursuant to Local Rule IB 3-2(a), objections were due by January 2, 2015. No objections have been filed. The Court has reviewed the record in this case and concurs with the Magistrate Judge's recommendation(s) that this case be dismissed.
Therefore, the Court has determined that Magistrate Judge's Recommendation should be ACCEPTED and ADOPTED to the extent that it is not inconsistent with this opinion.
IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that the Report and Recommendation (ECF No. 4) is ACCEPTED and ADOPTED in full.
IT IS ORDERED that this case is dismissed.
The Clerk shall enter judgment accordingly ...