ORDER

MARK H. COHEN, District Judge.

This action comes before the Court on the Final Report and Recommendation ("R&R") of Magistrate Judge Justin S. Anand [Doc. 54] recommending that Defendant's Motion to Suppress Cell Site Location Evidence filed on June 27, 2018 [Doc. 44] be denied. The Order for Service of the R&R [Doc. 55] provided notice that, in accordance with 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1), the parties were authorized to file objections within fourteen (14) days of the receipt of that Order. No objections have been filed within the time permitted.

Absent objection, the district court judge "may accept, reject, or modify, in whole or in part, the findings or recommendations made by the magistrate judge," 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1). Based upon the absence of objections to the R&R, in accordance with 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1), the Court has reviewed the R&R for plain error. See United States v. Slay, 714 F.2d 1093, 1095 (11th Cir. 1983). The Court finds no clear error and that the R&R is supported by law.

Accordingly, the Court ADOPTS the R&R [Doc. 54] as the Opinion and Order of the Court. It is hereby ORDERED that Defendant's Motion to Suppress Cell Site Location Evidence [Doc. 44] is DENIED.

It is further ORDERED that the time between the date the Magistrate Judge certified Defendant ready for trial on September 7, 2018 [Doc. 54], and the issuance of this Order, shall be excluded in calculating the date on which the trial of this case must commence under the Speedy Trial Act because the Court finds that the delay is for good cause, and the interests of justice in providing Defendant with consideration of his newly filed motion to suppress outweigh the right of the public and the right of the defendant to a speedy trial, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 3161, et seq.

IT IS SO ORDERED.