IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF OKLAHOMA

TIFFANY C. MATHIS, ) ) Plaintiff, ) ) v. ) Case No. CIV-24-00958-PRW ) LELAND DUDEK, Acting ) Commissioner of Social Security, ) ) Defendant. )

ORDER

On March 31, 2025, United States Magistrate Judge Amanda L. Maxfield issued a Report and Recommendation (Dkt. 12) in this action, in which she recommends that the Court dismiss Plaintiff Tiffany C. Mathis’s case pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(b). Judge Maxfield advised Mathis of her right to object to the Report and Recommendation by April 21, 2025, in accordance with

and Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 72, and that failure to make a timely objection would waive any right to appellate review of the factual and legal issues addressed in the Report and Recommendation. To date, Mathis has filed no objections. She has therefore waived her right to appellate review of the factual and legal issues addressed in the Report and Recommendation.1 In the absence of a timely objection, the Court reviews the Report and

1 United States v. One Parcel of Real Prop.,

, 1059–60 (10th Cir. 1996). Recommendation to confirm that there is no plain error on the face of the record.” Finding none, the Court agrees with Judge Maxfield’s analysis and conclusions. Upon review, the Court ADOPTS the Report and Recommendation (Dkt. 12) in full and DISMISSES the case WITHOUT PREJUDICE. IT IS SO ORDERED this 13th day of August 2025.

PATRICK R. WYRICK UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

2 Summers v. State of Utah,

(10th Cir. 1991) (“In the absence of timely objection, the district court may review a magistrate’s report under any standard it deems appropriate.’’).