United States of America v. Hinds

Filing 9

ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS. For the reasons set forth in the attached Order, the court affirms and adopts the Report and Recommendation as the opinion of the court. Counsel for plaintiff shall serve a copy of this Memorandum and Order upon defendant and file a declaration of service by August 12, 2011. The Clerk of the Court is respectfully directed to enter a default judgment against defendant in the amount of $2,948.96 in principal, $1,274.92 in interest, $0.20 in per diem interest from February 25, 2011 through the date of judgment, post-judgment interest to be calculated in accordance with 28 U.S.C. § 1961, and $35 in costs, and to close the case. Ordered by Judge Kiyo A. Matsumoto on 8/11/2011. (Zeehandelaar, Rachel)

Download PDF
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK --------------------------------------- X UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff, ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION -against11-CV-169 (KAM)(LB) KEVIN J. HINDS Defendant. --------------------------------------- X MATSUMOTO, United States District Judge: Plaintiff United States of America (“plaintiff”) brought this action against defaulting defendant Kevin J. Hinds (“defendant”), alleging that defendant has failed to repay a federal student loan. (See generally ECF No. 1, Compl.) Presently before the court is a Report and Recommendation (“R&R”) issued by Magistrate Judge Bloom on June 27, 2011, recommending that this court enter a default judgment against defendant in the amount of $2,948.96 in principal, $1,274.92 in interest, $0.20 in per diem interest from February 25, 2011 through the date of judgment, post-judgment interest to be calculated in accordance with 28 U.S.C. § 1961, and $35 in costs. (ECF No. 7, R&R, at 8.) The Report and Recommendation directed counsel for the plaintiff to serve a copy of the Report and Recommendation on defendant and to promptly file a declaration of service with the court. (R&R at 8.) Plaintiff sent notice of the Report and Recommendation to defendant on June 30, 2010 and filed a declaration of service on the same date. (ECF No. 8, Affidavit of Service, dated June 30, 2011.) As explicitly noted at the end of the Report and Recommendation, any objections to the Report and Recommendation were to be filed within fourteen days of receipt of the report. (ECF No. 7, R&R, at 8.) The statutory period for filing objections has expired, and no objections to Magistrate Judge Bloom’s Report and Recommendation have been filed. In reviewing a Report and Recommendation, the district court “may accept, reject, or modify, in whole or in part, the findings or recommendations made by the magistrate judge.” U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C). 28 Where no objection to the Report and Recommendation has been filed, the district court “need only satisfy itself that that there is no clear error on the face of the record.” Urena v. New York, 160 F. Supp. 2d 606, 609-10 (S.D.N.Y. 2001) (quoting Nelson v. Smith, 618 F. Supp. 1186, 1189 (S.D.N.Y. 1985). Upon a thorough review of the Report and Recommendation, and considering that the parties have failed to object to any of Magistrate Judge Bloom’s thorough and wellreasoned recommendations, the court finds no clear error in Magistrate Judge Bloom’s Report and Recommendation and hereby affirms and adopts the Report and Recommendation as the opinion of the court. Counsel for plaintiff shall serve a copy of this 2 Memorandum and Order upon defendant and file a declaration of service by August 12, 2011. The Clerk of the Court is respectfully directed to enter a default judgment against defendant in the amount of $2,948.96 in principal, $1,274.92 in interest, $0.20 in per diem interest from February 25, 2011 through the date of judgment, post-judgment interest to be calculated in accordance with 28 U.S.C. § 1961, and $35 in costs, and to close the case. SO ORDERED. Dated: August 11, 2011 Brooklyn, New York _________ __/s/ Kiyo A. Matsumoto United States District Judge 3

Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.


Why Is My Information Online?