ORDER

GREGORY F. VAN TATENHOVE, District Judge.

This matter is before the Court on the Report and Recommendation filed by former United States Magistrate Judge Robert E. Wier. [R. 302.] This matter was settled before Judge Wehrman in January, 2018. [See R. 271.] Since that time, Karen Lawrence has filed a motion for this Court to enforce the settlement agreement despite movement from Michigan Probate Court and to direct the defense to send the settlement funds to Ms. Lawrence's attorney directly. [See R. 290.] Judge Wier recommends recognizing the validity of the settlement, but otherwise denying Karen Lawrence's Motion for Fees and Costs. [See R. 290.] Judge Wier's Report advised the parties that any objections must be filed within fourteen (14) days of service. [Id. at 8.] The time to file objections has passed and neither party has objected nor sought an extension of time to do so.

Generally, this Court must make a de novo determination of those portions of the Report and Recommendation to which objections are made. 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(c). When no objections are made, this Court is not required to "review . . . a magistrate's factual or legal conclusions, under a de novo or any other standard. . . ." See Thomas v. Arn, 474 U.S. 140, 151 (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 agrees with the Magistrate Judge's Report and Recommendation.

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

1. The Magistrate Judge's Report and Recommendation [R. 302] is ADOPTED as the opinion of this Court; and

2. Karen Lawrence's Motion for Fees [R. 290] is GRANTED in part and DENIED in part as described in the Recommended Disposition;

3. In accordance with the Recommended Disposition, the settlement is declared valid and the defense shall comply with the Magistrate Judge's instructions to tender settlement funds;

4. Various motions are termed as MOOT due to the settlement and cancelled trial [R. 218; R. 223; R. 243; R. 246; R. 247; R. 248; R. 252; R. 259; R. 260.]; and

5. Parties are DIRECTED to file an Agreed Order dismissing this case within fifteen (15) days from the date of entry of this Order. The Court will entertain a motion to redocket this action upon application to this Court within fifteen (15) days of entry of this Order if the settlement is not consummated.