DANNY C. REEVES, District Judge.
This matter is pending for consideration of the Recommended Disposition regarding Defendant Arthur Jent, Jr.'s competency. [Record No. 119] Following an evaluation conducted by licensed forensic psychologist Judith Campbell, Ph.D., at the Federal Medical Center in Lexington, Kentucky, United States Magistrate Judge Hanly A. Ingram held a competency hearing. After reviewing all relevant materials, Magistrate Judge Ingram recommended that the Court find Jent competent to proceed in this matter. [ Id., pp. 5-6] Additionally, he recommended that certain suggestions offered by Dr. Campbell in the Psychiatric Report be implemented. [ See Record No. 114, p. 9] Neither Jent nor the United States has objected to the Recommended Disposition.
While this Court must make a de novo determination of those portions of the magistrate judge's recommendations to which an objection is made, 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C), "[i]t does not appear that Congress intended to require district court review of a magistrate's factual or legal conclusions, under a de novo or any other standard, when neither party objects to those findings." Thomas v. Arn, 474 U.S. 140, 150 (1985). Moreover, a party who fails to file objections to a magistrate judge's proposed findings of fact and recommendation waives the right to appeal. See United States v. Branch, 537 F.3d 582, 587 (6th Cir. 2008); Wright v. Holbrook, 794 F.2d 1152, 1154-55 (6th Cir. 1986).
As outlined in the Recommended Disposition, the magistrate judge found no evidence to support a finding that the defendant is not competent, and found nothing that would permit an incompetency finding by a preponderance of the evidence. [Record No. 119, p. 5] Further, the evidence supports a finding that Jent is able to understand the nature and consequences of the proceedings and can properly assist in his defense. [ Id. ] Accordingly, it is hereby
ORDERED that the Recommended Disposition of United States Magistrate Judge Hanly A. Ingram [Record No. 119] is ...