CATHY SEIBEL, District Judge
Before the Court is the Report and Recommendation ("R R") dated December 16, 2009, of Magistrate Judge Paul E. Davison in this action. (Doc. 24.)
A district court reviewing a magistrate judge's R R "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)(C). Parties may raise objections to the R R, but they must be "specific" and "written," and submitted "[w]ithin 10 days after being served with a copy of the recommended disposition." Fed.R.Civ.P. 72(b)(2); see also 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C). The district court may adopt those portions of the R R to which no timely objections have been made, provided no clear error is apparent from the face of the record. See Lewis v. Zon, 573 F. Supp. 2d 804, 811 (S.D.N.Y. 2008); Nelson v. Smith, 618 F. Supp. 1186, 1189 (S.D.N.Y. 1985); Fed.R.Civ.P. 72 advisory committee's note (b).
Plaintiff's time to object to the R R has run and she has filed no objections. I discern from the face of the record no clear error in the recommendation of the R R, and accordingly it is adopted as the decision of the Court. The Motion to Dismiss is granted, and the Clerk of the Court is respectfully directed to terminate the pending motion (Doc. 23), and close the case.
SO ORDERED.