EDWARD G. SMITH, J.
ORDER
AND NOW, this 30th day of August, 2018, after considering the petition for a writ of habeas corpus under 28 U.S.C. § 2254 filed by the pro se petitioner, Leslie R. Mitchell (Doc. No. 1), the petitioner's "writ of habeas corpus §§ 2241-2254" (Doc. No. 12), the respondents' response to the petition (Doc. No. 14), and United States Chief Magistrate Judge Linda K. Caracappa's report and recommendation (Doc. No. 16), it is hereby ORDERED as follows:
This document is written in a manner similar to a memorandum of law.
1. The clerk of court is DIRECTED to remove this action from civil suspense and RETURN it to the court's active docket;
2. The Honorable Linda K. Caracappa's report and recommendation (Doc. No. 16) is APPROVED and ADOPTED;
Since neither party filed objections to Judge Caracappa's report and recommendation, the court need not review the report before adopting it. Henderson v. Carlson, 812 F.2d 874, 878 (3d Cir. 1987). Nonetheless, "the better practice is for the district judge to afford some level of review to dispositive legal issues raised by the report." Id. As such, the court reviewed the report for plain error. See Oldrati v. Apfel, 33 F. Supp. 2d 397, 399 (E.D. Pa. 1998) ("In the absence of a timely objection, . . . this Court will review [the magistrate judge's] Report and Recommendation for clear error." (internal quotation marks omitted)). 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)(C). The court has reviewed Judge Caracappa's report for plain error and has found none. --------
3. The petitioner's petition for writ of habeas corpus is DENIED;
4. The petitioner has not made a substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right and is therefore not entitled to a certificate of appealability, 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2); and
5. The clerk of court shall mark this case as CLOSED.
BY THE COURT:
/s/ Edward G. Smith
EDWARD G. SMITH, J.