IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA
September 12, 2012
JEFFREY BEARD, ET AL., RESPONDENTS
The opinion of the court was delivered by: (Judge Conner)
AND NOW, this 12th day of September, 2012, upon consideration of the Report and Recommendation of United States Magistrate Judge Martin C. Carlson (Doc. 40), recommending that petitioner's motion to alter or amend the judgment (Doc. 30) be denied, and, following an independent review of the record, it appearing that neither party has objected to the magistrate judge's report and recommendation, and that there is no clear error on the face of the record,*fn1 see Nara v. Frank, 488 F.3d 187, 194 (3d Cir. 2007) (explaining that "failing to timely object to [a report and recommendation] in a civil proceeding may result in forfeiture of de novo review at the district court level"), it is hereby ORDERED that:
1. The Report and Recommendation of Magistrate Judge Carlson (Doc. 40) are ADOPTED.
2. Petitioner's motion to alter or amend the judgment (Doc. 30) is DENIED.
CHRISTOPHER C. CONNER United States District Judge