ORDER

GLORIA M. NAVARRO, Chief District Judge.

Pending before the Court is the Report and Recommendation ("R&R") of United States Magistrate Judge Carl W. Hoffman, (ECF No. 23), which recommends that Plaintiff Pamela Marie Cagliari's ("Plaintiff's") Motion to Remand, (ECF No. 18), be denied, and Defendant Nancy A. Berryhill's ("Defendant's") Cross-Motion to Affirm Agency Decision, (ECF No. 21), be granted. To date, no party filed an objection to Judge Hoffman's R&R.

A party may file specific written objections to the findings and recommendations of a United States Magistrate Judge made pursuant to Local Rule IB 1-4. 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B); D. Nev. R. IB 3-2. Upon the filing of such objections, the Court must make a de novo determination of those portions to which objections are made. Id. The 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); D. Nev. R. IB 3-2(b). 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, e.g., United States v. Reyna-Tapia, 328 F.3d 1114, 1122 (9th Cir. 2003).

Here, no party filed an objection to Judge Hoffman's R&R, (ECF No. 23), and the deadline to do so has passed. (See R&R, ECF No. 23) (setting a deadline of July 11, 2019, for objections by either party).

Accordingly,

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the Report and Recommendation, (ECF No. 23), is ADOPTED in full.

The Clerk is instructed to enter judgment accordingly and close the case.