IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA

ANTHONY M. CHARLES, No. 4:19-CV-00558

Petitioner, (Judge Brann)

v. (Magistrate Judge Arbuckle)

WARDEN SCOTT FINLEY,

Respondent.

ORDER MARCH 20, 2020 Anthony M. Charles filed this

petition challenging a decision by the Federal Bureau of Prisons (BOP) recommending that Charles receive six months’ placement in a Residential Reentry Center, rather than the maximum allowable twelve months.1 On February 13, 2020, Magistrate Judge William I. Arbuckle issued a Report and Recommendation recommending that this Court deny Charles’ petition.2 No timely objections were filed to this Report and Recommendation.

1 Doc. 1. 2 Doc. 14. Where no objection is made to a report and recommendation, this Court will review the recommendation only for clear error.3 Regardless of whether timely

objections are made, district courts may accept, reject, or modify—in whole or in part—the findings or recommendations made by the magistrate judge.4 After reviewing the record, the Court finds no clear error in Magistrate Judge Arbuckle’s

conclusion that the BOP did not abuse its discretion in determining that Charles should receive six months’ placement in a Residential Reentry Center. Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that: 1. Magistrate Judge William I. Arbuckle’s Report and Recommendation

(Doc. 14), is ADOPTED; 2. Charles’

petition (Doc. 1) is DENIED; and 3. The Clerk of Court is directed to CLOSE this case.

BY THE COURT:

s/ Matthew W. Brann Matthew W. Brann United States District Judge

3 Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b), advisory committee notes; see Henderson v. Carlson,

(3d Cir. 1987) (explaining that court should in some manner review recommendations regardless of whether objections were filed). 4

(b)(1); Local Rule 72.31.