ORDER

DONALD L. GRAHAM, Senior District Judge.

THIS CAUSE came before the Court originally on Defendant Jack Kachkar's ("Defendant" or "Kachkar") Motion to Suppress Evidence and Request for Evidentiary Hearing. [D.E. 254]. The matter is now before the Court on the Magistrate Judge's Report and Recommendation. [D.E. 433]. The Court also considers the United States' Objections [D.E. 441] and Kachkar's Objections to the Magistrate Judge's Report and Recommendation. [D.E. 449].

THIS MATTER was initiated when Kachkar filed a Motion to Suppress Evidence and Request for Evidentiary Hearing. [D.E. 254]. Specifically, Kachkar seeks to suppress documents provided by the Canadian government to the U.S. Department of Justice pursuant to a request under the Mutual Assistance Treaty ("MLAT") between the United States and Canada. Defendant argues that the documents were obtained from Canada in violation of the Fourth Amendment. Alternatively, Kachkar argues that the government conducted impermissible searches of the documents after they were sent from Canada to the United States.

The matter was assigned to the Honorable United States Magistrate Judge Alicia M. Otazo-Reyes. [D.E.258]. Upon consideration of the evidentiary record and the arguments of counsel, Magistrate Judge Otazo-Reyes issued a report recommending that Kachkar's Motion to Suppress be denied. [D.E. 433]. Thereafter, the government and Kachkar filed timely objections to the Magistrate Judge's report and recommendation. [D.E. 441 and 449].

The government objects to the Magistrate Judge's assumption that Kachkar satisfied his burden of proving that the documents are covered by the attorney-client privilege but agrees that it does not impact the Magistrate Judge's ultimate conclusion. [D.E. 441]. With respect to documents Kachkar asserts are subject to attorneyclient privilege, the Magistrate Judge assumed that Kachkar met his threshold burden of proving privilege only for the purpose of legal reasoning in issuing the Report and Recommendation. Accordingly the government's objections are overruled.

Defendant Kachkar objects to the Magistrate Judge's findings of fact, conclusions of law, and failure to address every argument in the Report and Recommendation. After a de novo review of the record Kachkar's objections are also overruled. The parties can request relief at the appropriate time as set forth in the R&R. THE COURT has conducted a de novo review of the file and is otherwise fully advised in the premises. Accordingly, it is

ORDERED AND ADJUDGED that United States Magistrate Judge Otazo-Reyes's Report is hereby RATIFIED, AFFIRMED and APPROVED in its entirety [D.E.433]. It is further

ORDERED AND ADJUDGED that the United States' Objections [D.E. 441] are OVERRULED. It is further

ORDERED AND ADJUDGED that Defendant Kachkar's Objections [D.E. 449] are OVERRULED. It is further

ORDERED AND ADJUDGED that Defendant Jack Kachkar's Motion to Suppress Evidence and Request for Evidentiary Hearing [D.E. 254]is DENIED.

DONE AND ORDERED.