ORDER

ROBERT E. WIER, District Judge.

This matter is before the Court on the Recommended Disposition (DE #317) of United States Magistrate Judge Hanly A. Ingram, addressing Defendant Darryl Moore's guilty plea to Count 1 of the Second Superseding Indictment (DE #228). Defendant appeared before Judge Ingram on September 11, 2019. See DE #316 (Minutes). After consenting to plead before a United States Magistrate Judge and engaging in a full Rule 11 colloquy, Moore proceeded to plead guilty. DE #317 at ¶¶ 1-2. Judge Ingram found Defendant competent to plead and concluded that Moore's plea was knowing and voluntary; he further found that an adequate factual basis supported the plea as to each essential element of the charged offense. Id. at ¶¶ 2-3. Accordingly, Judge Ingram recommended the Court accept Defendant's plea and adjudge him guilty of Count 1 of the Second Superseding Indictment. Id. at ¶ 4.

Neither Moore nor the Government objected to DE #317 within the allotted three-day period. See id. at 3. While this Court reviews de novo those portions of a Report and Recommendation to which a party objects, see 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1), it is not required to "review. . . a magistrate [judge]'s factual or legal conclusions, under a de novo or any other standard, when neither party objects to those findings." Thomas v. Arn, 106 S.Ct. 466, 472 (1985). Where the parties do not object to the magistrate judge's recommended disposition, they waive any right to review. See Fed. R. Crim. P. 59(b); United States v. White, 874 F.3d 490, 495 (6th Cir. 2017) ("When a party . . . fails to lodge a specific objection to a particular aspect of a magistrate judge's report and recommendation, we consider that issue forfeited on appeal."); see also United States v. Branch, 537 F.3d 582, 587 (6th Cir. 2008) (noting that "[t]he law in this Circuit is clear" that a party who fails to object to a magistrate judge's recommendation forfeits the right to appeal its adoption).

The Court thus ADOPTS the Recommended Disposition (DE #317), accepts the plea, and ADJUDGES Defendant guilty of Count 1 of the Second Superseding Indictment. The Court further CANCELS the jury trial (currently set for October 15, 2019) as to Moore. An Order scheduling Defendant's sentencing will follow. Moore's custodial status, per the record, remains as detained.