ORDER

LISA GODBEY WOOD, Chief District Judge.

After an independent and de novo review of the entire record, the undersigned concurs with the Magistrate Judge's Report and Recommendation, to which Objections have been filed. In his Objections, Petitioner Art Williams ("Williams") contends that he was sentenced under 21 U.S.C. § 841(b)(1)(C), not 21 U.S.C. § 841(b)(1)(A) as the Government claimed. Williams asserts that the sentence he faced under this statute was no more than 20 years' imprisonment. Even if Williams' assertion is correct, the fact remains that he was sentenced to 216 months' imprisonment. Thus, whether Williams was sentenced pursuant to § 841 (b)(1)(C) or § 841(b)(1)(A) is of no moment, as the sentence Williams received does not exceed the statutory maximum sentence applicable to either of these subsections. Williams' remaining Objections relate to sentencing issues, which, as the Magistrate Judge noted, must be brought pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2255. In the alternative, Williams' assertions can be brought pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2241 if he could satisfy section 2255's savings clause. Williams fails to meet the requirements for satisfying the savings clause, as proscribed by Wofford v. Scott, 177 F.3d 1236 (11th Cir. 1999).

Williams' Objections are overruled. The Magistrate Judge's Report and Recommendation is adopted as the opinion of the Court. Williams' petition for writ of habeas corpus, filed pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2241 is DISMISSED. The Clerk of Court is directed to enter the appropriate judgment of dismissal.

SO ORDERED.