ORDER

CHRISTOPHER C. CONNER, Chief District Judge.

AND NOW, this 8th day of November, 2018, upon consideration of the report (Doc. 21) of Chief Magistrate Judge Susan E. Schwab, recommending the court dismiss the complaint (Doc. 1) of pro se plaintiff June K. Taylor ("Taylor") for failure to file an amended complaint as directed by the court by order dated June 21, 2018, (see Doc. 16), and failure to respond to the court's order to show cause why the above-captioned action should not be dismissed pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(b), (see Doc. 18), and it appearing that Taylor has not objected to the report, see FED. R. CIV. P. 72(b)(2), and has simply requested that "when you dismiss, please dismiss without prejudice," (Doc. 17), and the court noting that failure of a party to timely object to a magistrate judge's conclusions "may result in forfeiture of de novo review at the district court level," Nara v. Frank, 488 F.3d 187, 194 (3d Cir. 2007) (citing Henderson v. Carlson, 812 F.2d 874, 878-79 (3d Cir. 1987)), but that, as a matter of good practice, a district court should "afford some level of review to dispositive legal issues raised by the report," Henderson, 812 F.2d at 878; see also Taylor v. Comm'r of Soc. Sec., 83 F.Supp.3d 625, 626 (M.D. Pa. 2015) (citing Univac Dental Co. v. Dentsply Int'l, Inc., 702 F.Supp.2d 465, 469 (M.D. Pa. 2010)), in order to "satisfy itself that there is no clear error on the face of the record," FED. R. CIV. P. 72(b), advisory committee notes, and, following independent review of the record, the court in agreement with Judge Schwab's recommendation, and concluding that there is no clear error on the face of the record, it is hereby ORDERED that: