Baltazar v. Petland Discounts, Inc. et al

Filing 51

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS: Accordingly, plaintiff's motion to amend his complaint to add a claim for tortious spoliation is denied. The case has been and continues to be referred to Judge Bloom for any needed pre-trial management. Ordered by Judge Eric N. Vitaliano on 7/4/2014. c/m to pro se pltf (Fernandez, Erica)

FILED

IN CLE~S OFFICE
U.S. DISTRICT COURT E.D.N.Y.

*

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK

--------------------------------------------------------------:x
MYNOR FEDERICO NUNEZ BALTAZAR,

JUL 8 - 2014

*

BROOKLYN OFFICE

Plaintiff,
MEMORANDUM & ORDER
-against13-cv-5139 (ENV) (LB)
PETLAND DISCOUNTS INC., KERI ANN
NELSON, BOB SMITH, ROSIE CONSIGLIO,
PATRICIA ROSE, DERON PARCHMENT,
and FERNANDO IGLESISAS.,
Defendants.

x

VITALIANO, D.J.,
On May 22, 2014, Magistrate Judge Lois Bloom issued a Report &
Recommendation ("R&R") in which she recommends that pro se plaintiff Mynor
Baltazar's motion to amend his complaint in the instant employment discrimination
action should be denied because (1) Baltazar "has not shown good cause for why his
request to amend the complaint was not made until after the deadline set by the [the
Court]," and (2) his "proposed claim for tortious spoliation would not survive a
motion to dismiss and the proposed amendment is therefore futile".
In reviewing. an R&R of a magistrate judge, a district judge "may accept,
reject, or modify, in whole or in part, the findings or recommendations made by the
magistrate judge." 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(l). A district judge is required to "make a de

novo determination upon the record, or after additional evidence, of any portion of
the magistrate judge's disposition to which specific written objection has been
made" by any party. Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b). But, where no timely objection has been

1

made, the "district court need only satisfy itself that there is no clear error on the
face of the record" to accept a magistrate judge's report and recommendation.

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)).
The R&R gave proper notice that any objection must have been filed within
14 days-June 9, 2014. Neither plaintiff nor defendants have objected to Judge
Bloom's R&R, much less within the time prescribed by 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(l). In
accord with the applicable standard of review, the Court finds Judge Bloom's R&R
to be correct, well-reasoned and free of any clear error. The Court, therefore,
adopts it in its entirety as the opinion of the Court
Conclusion
Accordingly, plaintiff's motion to amend his complaint to add a claim for
tortious spoliation is denied.
The case has been and continues to be referred to Judge Bloom for any
needed pre-trial management.

-

SO ORDERED.
Dated:

Brooklyn, New York
July 4, 2014

s/Eric N. Vitaliano

- -

ERIC N. VIT ALiAili6.
United States District Judge
D

2