ORDER

CHRISTOPHER C. CONNER, Chief District Judge.

AND NOW, this 19th day of April, 2018, upon consideration of the report (Doc. 18) of Magistrate Judge Martin C. Carlson, recommending the court vacate the decision of the administrative law judge denying the application of plaintiff Kristen Stoner ("Stoner") for disability insurance benefits and supplemental security income and remand this matter for further proceedings, wherein Judge Carlson opines that the administrative law judge's decision is not "supported by substantial evidence," 42 U.S.C. § 405(g), and it appearing that neither Stoner nor the Commissioner of Social Security ("Commissioner") object to the report, see FED. R. CIV. P. 72(b)(2), and that the Commissioner has expressly waived the opportunity to do so, (see Doc. 19), and the court noting that failure to timely object to a magistrate judge's conclusions "may result in forfeiture of de novo review at the district court level," Nara v. Frank, 488 F.3d 187, 194 (3d Cir. 2007) (citing Henderson v. Carlson, 812 F.2d 874, 878-79 (3d Cir. 1987)), but that, as a matter of good practice, a district court should "afford some level of review to dispositive legal issues raised by the report," Henderson, 812 F.2d at 878; see also Taylor v. Comm'r of Soc. Sec., 83 F.Supp.3d 625, 626 (M.D. Pa. 2015) (citing Univac Dental Co. v. Dentsply Int'l, Inc., 702 F.Supp.2d 465, 469 (M.D. Pa. 2010)), in order to "satisfy itself that there is no clear error on the face of the record," FED. R. CIV. P. 72(b), advisory committee notes, and, following review of the record, the court being in agreement with Judge Carlson's recommendation, and concluding that there is no clear error on the face of the record, it is hereby ORDERED that: