ORDER

GREGORY F. VAN TATENHOVE, District Judge.

This matter is before the Court on the Recommended Disposition (also known as a Report and Recommendation) [R. 61] filed by United States Magistrate Judge Hanly A. Ingram. The Defendant, was charged with two violations of his supervised release: (1) committing another federal, state, or local crime and (2) failing to notify his probation officer within seventy-two hours of being arrested or questioned by law enforcement. [R. 61 at 1-2.] The underlying assault charge that led to violation 1 was ultimately dismissed. [Id. at 2.]

On August 13, Judge Ingram conducted a final hearing, wherein Defendant entered a voluntary and knowing stipulation to violation 2. [Id. at 2.] On August 20, Judge Ingram issued a Report and Recommendation which recommended that Defendant be sentenced to time-served with twelve months of supervised release to follow. [Id. at 6.] Under 18 U.S.C. § 3853(e)(3), the maximum revocation sentence that could be imposed is two years imprisonment. [Id. at 4.] Judge Ingram appropriately considered the 18 U.S.C. § 3353 factors in coming to his recommended sentence. [Id. at 3-5.] No objections were filed during the relevant time period and Defendant waived his right of allocution. [R. 62.]

Generally, this Court must make a de novo determination of those portions of a recommended disposition to which objections are made. 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(c). When no objections are made, however, this Court is not required to "review . . . a magistrate's factual or legal conclusions, under a de novo or any other standard . . . ." Thomas v. Arn, 474 U.S. 140, 150 (1985). Parties who fail to object to a Magistrate's report and recommendation are also barred from appealing a district court's order adopting that report and recommendation. United States v. Walters, 638 F.2d 947 (6th Cir. 1981). Nevertheless, this Court has examined the record, and it agrees with the Magistrate Judge's Recommended Disposition.

Accordingly, and the Court being sufficiently advised, it is hereby ORDERED as follows:

(1) The Recommended Disposition [R. 61] as to the Defendant, Michael Luttrell, is ADOPTED as and for the Opinion of the Court;

(2) Luttrell is found to have violated the terms of his Supervised Release as set forth in the Petition and Addendum filed by the U.S. Probation Office;

(3) Luttrell is SENTENCED to TIME SERVED;

(4) Supervised release is REIMPOSED for a period of twelve-months, under the conditions recommended by the Magistrate Judge;

(5) Luttrell has WAIVED his right to allocution [R. 61]; and,

(6) Judgment shall be entered promptly.