United States District Court, M.D. Pennsylvania
CHRISTOPHER C. CONNER, District Judge.
AND NOW, this 24th day of February, 2014, upon consideration of the report and recommendation (Doc. 23) of Chief Magistrate Judge Martin C. Carlson, recommending that the court grant the defendant's motion (Doc. 19) pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6) and dismiss the pro se plaintiff's complaint (Doc. 1) with prejudice for failure to prosecute pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41, see FED. R. CIV. P. 41(b) (permitting court to dismiss lawsuit if "the plaintiff fails to prosecute or to comply with these rules or a court order") and failure to oppose the motion, see LOCAL RULE OF COURT 7.6 ("Any party who fails [to timely file a brief in opposition] shall be deemed not to oppose such motion."), and also for failure to fully exhaust administrative remedies, see 28 U.S.C. § 2675(a) ("An action shall not be instituted against the United States for money damages for injury or loss of property or personal injury... unless the claimant shall have first presented the claim to the appropriate Federal agency and his claim shall have been finally denied by the agency..."), and it appearing that neither party has objected to the magistrate judge's report,  and that there is no clear error on the face of the record,  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 of the magistrate judge (Doc. 23) is ADOPTED in its entirety.
2. Defendant's motion (Doc. 19) to dismiss is GRANTED.
3. Plaintiff's complaint (Doc. 1) is DISMISSED ...