ORDER

MATTHEW W. BRANN, District Judge.

Before the Court for disposition is a Report and Recommendation prepared by Chief Magistrate Judge Susan E. Schwab on October 3, 2016.1 In this Report, Chief Magistrate Judge Schwab recommended that the Court grant Defendants' Motion to Dismiss the Amended Complaint and that Plaintiff be granted leave to file a second amended complaint.2 On October 19, 2016, Plaintiff John DeRaffelle filed a "Reply to the Report and Recommendation" which this Court will construe as objections.3

Upon designation, a magistrate judge may "conduct hearings, including evidentiary hearings, and . . . submit to a judge of the court proposed findings of fact and recommendations."4 Once filed, this Report and Recommendation is disseminated to the parties in the case who then have the opportunity to file written objections.5 Where no objection is made to a report and recommendation, the court should, as a matter of good practice, "satisfy itself that there is no clear error on the face of the record in order to accept the recommendation."6 Nevertheless, whether timely objections are made or not, the district court may accept, reject or modify, in whole or in part, the findings or recommendations made by the magistrate judge.7

Following independent review of the record, I am satisfied that the Report and Recommendation contains no clear facial error. Furthermore, while Plaintiff has filed Objections, he has provided no legal argument to the Court as to (1) why his due process and Fourth Amendment claims should not be dismissed due to the exigent circumstances, or (2) why, to the extent his claims are based on the issuance of the citation, the Heck favorable termination rule8 does not bar his claims.9 Rather, having reviewed de novo the entirety of the Report and Recommendation, I am in agreement that, based solely on the allegations contained within his Amended Complaint,10 Plaintiff fails to state a claim under either the due process clause of the Fourteenth Amendment clause or the Fourth Amendment. I will therefore not rehash Chief Magistrate Judge Schwab's sound reasoning and legal citation on this issue.

Finally, because I will grant leave to amend in accordance with the conclusion of the Report and Recommendation, I will impart to Plaintiff the following guidance. First, I note that Plaintiff's Objections contain obscene language. As acknowledged by Defendants in their brief in opposition to Plaintiff's objections, I previously admonished Plaintiff for such language in a separate lawsuit. I repeat that admonition here and opine that such inflammatory language does not advance Plaintiff's case. Second and relatedly, I advise that pro se Plaintiff study the legal deficiencies of his Complaint outlined by the Report and Recommendation, and take heed of the directive contained in footnote 15 of the Report, located on page 16. Plaintiff is warned that he will receive only one further opportunity to construct a legally sufficient complaint.

AND NOW, therefore, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED THAT: