Multi-Link Container Line LLC v. Russell-Newman, Inc.

Filing 15

ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION: On 6/29/12, Magistrate Judge Levy issued a Report and Recommendation recommending that the Court award plaintiff a default judgment against defendant in the total amount of $111,805.96 in damages. The Court adopts the R&R without de novo review and directs the Clerk to enter judgment in accordance with the R&R. Forwarded for judgment. Ordered by Judge Frederic Block on 7/17/2012. (Chee, Alvin)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK
-------------------------------------------------------------x
MULTI-LINK CONTAINER LINE LLC,
Plaintiff,
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
Case No. 11-CV-3093 (FB) (RML)

-againstRUSSELL-NEWMAN, INC.,
DefendantS.
-------------------------------------------------------x
Appearances:
For the Plaintiff:
DAVID COHEN, ESQ.
102 Montauk Blvd
POB 86
East Hampton, NY 11937

BLOCK, Senior District Judge:
On June 29, 2012, Magistrate Judge Levy issued a Report and
Recommendation (“R&R”) recommending that the Court award plaintiff a default
judgment against defendant in the total amount of $111,805.96 in damages, consisting of
$104,442.61 in unpaid invoices, $6,953.30 in interest, and $410 in costs. See R&R at 3. The
R&R also stated that defendant’s failure to object within fourteen days would preclude the
District Court’s review. See id. at 5. Plaintiff’s attorney mailed a copy of the R&R to
defendant on June 29, 2012 via first class mail; no objections have been filed.
If clear notice has been given of the consequences of failure to object, and
there are no objections, the Court may adopt the R&R without de novo review. See Mario
v. P & C Food Mkts., Inc., 313 F.3d 758, 766 (2d Cir. 2002) (“Where parties receive clear notice

1

of the consequences, failure timely to object to a magistrate’s report and recommendation
operates as a waiver of further judicial review of the magistrate’s decision.”). The Court
will excuse the failure to object and conduct de novo review if it appears that the magistrate
judge may have committed plain error, see Spence v. Superintendent, Great Meadow Corr.
Facility, 219 F.3d 162, 174 (2d Cir. 2000); no such error appears here. Accordingly, the Court
adopts the R&R without de novo review and directs the Clerk to enter judgment in
accordance with the R&R.
SO ORDERED.
s/ Judge Frederic Block
_________________________
FREDERIC BLOCK
Senior United States District Judge
Brooklyn, NY
July 17, 2012

2