ORDER ACCEPTING AND ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION OF MAGISTRATE JUDGE CARLA B. CARRY

MIRANDA M. DU, District Judge.

Before the Court is the Report and Recommendation of United States Magistrate Judge Carla B. Carry (ECF No. 23) ("R&R") relating to Plaintiff's motion to remand (ECF No. 15) and Defendant's response and cross-motion to affirm (ECF No. 20).1 Judge Carry recommended denying Plaintiff's motion and granting Defendant's motion. (ECF No. 23.) Plaintiff had until February 28, 2019, to file an objection. To date, no objection to the R&R has been filed.

This Court "may accept, reject, or modify, in whole or in part, the findings or recommendations made by the magistrate judge." 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1). Where a party timely objects to a magistrate judge's report and recommendation, then the Court is required to "make a de novo determination of those portions of the [report and recommendation] to which objection is made." 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1). Where a party fails to object, however, the court is not required to conduct "any review at all . . . of any issue that is not the subject of an objection." Thomas v. Arn, 474 U.S. 140, 149 (1985). Indeed, the Ninth Circuit has recognized that a district court is not required to review a magistrate judge's report and recommendation where no objections have been filed. See United States v. Reyna-Tapia, 328 F.3d 1114 (9th Cir. 2003) (disregarding the standard of review employed by the district court when reviewing a report and recommendation to which no objections were made); see also Schmidt v. Johnstone, 263 F.Supp.2d 1219, 1226 (D. Ariz. 2003) (reading the Ninth Circuit's decision in Reyna-Tapia as adopting the view that district courts are not required to review "any issue that is not the subject of an objection."). Thus, if there is no objection to a magistrate judge's recommendation, then the Court may accept the recommendation without review. See, e.g., Johnstone, 263 F. Supp. 2d at 1226 (accepting, without review, a magistrate judge's recommendation to which no objection was filed).

Plaintiff failed to object to Judge Carry's recommendation. Nevertheless, this Court finds it appropriate to engage in a de novo review to determine whether to adopt Judge Carry's R&R. Upon reviewing the R&R and the relevant records, this Court agrees with Judge Carry that the administrative law judge's decision is supported by substantial evidence and will adopt the R&R.

It is therefore ordered, adjudged and decreed that the Report and Recommendation of Magistrate Judge Carla B. Carry (ECF No. 23) is accepted and adopted in full.

It is further ordered that Plaintiff's motion to remand (ECF No. 15) is denied.

It is further ordered that Defendant's cross-motion to affirm (ECF No. 20) is granted.

The Clerk of Court is directed to enter judgment in accordance with this Order and close this case.