
    Donna IANNONE, an individual v. J.C. PENNEY COMPANY; J.C. Penney Corporation, t/d/b/a J.C. Penney; Furniture Brands International, Inc.; Lane Furniture Industries, Inc.; Action Industries, Inc. Donna Iannone, Appellant.
    No. 07-2912.
    United States Court of Appeals, Third Circuit.
    Submitted Under Third Circuit LAR 34.1(a) June 30, 2008.
    Filed: July 18, 2008.
    Monte J. Rabner, Pittsburgh, PA, for Appellant.
    Jeffrey M. Olszewski, Cipriani & Werner, Pittsburgh, PA, Walter A. McClatchy, Jr., Krusen, Evans & Byrne, Philadelphia, PA, for J.C. Penney Company; J.C. Penney Corporation, t/d/b/a J.C. Penney; Furniture Brands International, Inc.; Lane Furniture Industries, Inc.; Action Industries, Inc.
    Before: RENDELL, SMITH and FISHER, Circuit Judges.
   OPINION OF THE COURT

RENDELL, Circuit Judge.

Plaintiff, Donna Iannone, appeals the District Court’s orders adopting the Report and Recommendation of the Magistrate Judge and entering final judgment in favor of the defendants, J.C. Penney Company, Inc., J.C. Penney Corporation, Inc. t/d/b/a J.C. Penney, (together “J.C. Penney”), Furniture Brands International, Inc., Lane Furniture Industries, Inc., and Action Industries, Inc. In her complaint, Iannone alleged that the defendants were liable for injuries she received from a defective reclining chair that was purchased from J.C. Penney and engineered by Lane Furniture, Inc. and/or Action Industries, Inc., wholly owned subsidiaries of Furniture Brands International, Inc. At the close of discovery, the defendants moved for summary judgment. The Magistrate Judge subsequently issued a Report and Recommendation recommending that defendants’ summary judgment motion be granted because the expert testimony offered by Iannone as to causation was not stated with the degree of certainty required under Pennsylvania law to create a genuine issue of material fact for trial. Iannone filed objections to the Report and Recommendation, but the District Court ultimately adopted it and entered final judgment in favor of defendants and against Iannone.

Having reviewed the record, we find the Magistrate Judge’s Report and Recommendation well-reasoned and do not find any ground for disturbing or varying from its analysis. Accordingly, we will affirm the order of the District Court for the reasons set forth in the Magistrate Judge’s thorough Report and Recommendation.  