ORDER (1) ADOPTING RECOMMENDED DISPOSITION OF REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION (ECF #41), (2) GRANTING DEFENDANTS' MOTIONS TO DISMISS AND MOTIONS FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT (ECF ## 11, 22, 28, 36) AND (3) DISMISSING PLAINTIFF'S COMPLAINT

MATTHEW F. LEITMAN, District Judge.

On January 17, 2018, Plaintiff Jessica Andres filed this action against the Defendants. (See ECF #1.) Among other things, Andres alleges that the Defendants violated the Fair Credit Reporting Act, 15 U.S.C. § 1681 et seq. (See id.) Each of the Defendants has either moved to dismiss Andres' Complaint or for summary judgment. (See ECF ## 11, 22, 28, 36.) Andres responded to each motion (see ECF ## 16, 31, 33, and 39), and each Defendant filed a reply brief. (See ECF ## 19, 32, 34, and 40.)

On August 15, 2018, the assigned Magistrate Judge issued a Report and Recommendation in which she recommended that the Court grant Defendants' motions and dismiss Andres' Complaint (the "R&R"). (See ECF #41.) At the conclusion of the R&R, the Magistrate Judge informed the parties that if they wanted to seek review of her recommendation, they needed to file specific objections with the Court within fourteen days. (See id. at Pg. ID 392-93.)

Andres has not filed any objections to the R&R. 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). Likewise, 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).

Accordingly, because Andres has failed to file any objections to the R&R, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the Magistrate Judge's recommended disposition of the pending motions is ADOPTED.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that (1) Defendants' motions to dismiss and/or for summary judgment (ECF ## 11, 22, 28, and 36) are GRANTED and (2) Andres' Complaint (ECF #1) is DISMISSED.