ORDER (1) GRANTING PLAINTIFF'S UNOPPOSED MOTION FOR VOLUNTARY DISMISSAL (ECF #12) AND (2) DISMISSING PLAINTIFF'S COMPLAINT (ECF #1) WITH PREJUDICE AND WITHOUT COSTS

MATTHEW F. LEITMAN, District Judge.

In this action, Plaintiff Pamela Darlene Sanford challenges the denial of her application for disability benefits. (See Compl., ECF #1.) On March 5, 2018, Sanford filed an unopposed motion to voluntarily dismiss her Complaint with prejudice and without costs pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(a)(2). (See Mot., ECF #12.) On that same day, the assigned Magistrate Judge issued a Report and Recommendation recommending that the Court grant Sanford's unopposed motion and dismiss her Complaint (the "R&R"). (See ECF #13.) At the conclusion of the R&R, the Magistrate Judge informed the parties that if they wanted to seek review of his recommendation, they needed to file specific objections with the Court within fourteen days. (See id. at Pg. ID 855.)

Neither party has filed an objection to the R&R. The failure to file objections to an R&R waives any further right to appeal. See Howard v. Sec'y of Health and Human Servs., 932 F.2d 505 (6th Cir. 1991); Smith v. Detroit Fed'n of Teachers Local 231, 829 F.2d 1370, 1373 (6th Cir. 1987). Likewise, the failure to object to an R&R releases the Court from its duty to independently review the matter. See Thomas v. Arn, 474 U.S. 140, 149 (1985).

Accordingly, because no party has filed an objection to the R&R, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the Magistrate Judge's recommendation to grant Sanford's unopposed motion is ADOPTED.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that (1) Sanford's unopposed motion for voluntary dismissal (ECF #12) is GRANTED and (2) Sanford's Complaint (ECF #1) is DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE AND WITHOUT COSTS.