ORDER

RAYMOND P. MOORE, District Judge.

Pending before the Court is the December 11, 2015 Report and Recommendation of U.S. Magistrate Judge Kristen L. Mix ("the R&R") (ECF No. 63) to deny pro se plaintiff Timothy Gonzales' ("plaintiff") motion for a preliminary injunction ("the motion") (ECF No. 18).

The R&R specifically advised the parties that written objections were due within 14 days after service of the same. (ECF No. 63 at 5.) The Magistrate Judge warned the parties that failure to file timely objections would waive de novo review of the R&R. (Id. at 6.) Despite the Magistrate Judge's warning, no objections to the R&R have been filed in this case.

"When no timely objection is filed, the court need only satisfy itself that there is no clear error on the face of the record in order to accept the recommendation." Fed.R.Civ.P. 72, Adv. Comm. Notes, subdivision (b) (1983); see also Summers v. Utah, 927 F.2d 1165, 1167 (10th Cir. 1991) ("In the absence of timely objection, the district court may review a magistrate's report under any standard it deems appropriate.").

In this light, after careful consideration of the law, the record, the parties' pleadings, and the unopposed R&R, the Court finds that the Magistrate Judge's analysis and recommendation exhibit no clear error and ADOPTS the same as if fully incorporated herein by reference.

As a result, the Court:

DENIES plaintiff's motion for a preliminary injunction (ECF No. 18).

SO ORDERED.