Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. v. Landi et al

Filing 38

ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION: Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b) and Rule 72, the Court has reviewed the R&R for clear error and, finding none, concurs with the R&R in its entirety. See Covey v. Simonton, 481 F. Supp. 2d 224, 226 (E.D.N.Y. 2007). Accordingly, the Clerk of Court is directed to enter judgment pursuant to this Order and close the case. Ordered by Judge Roslynn R. Mauskopf on 3/13/2018. (Taronji, Robert)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK

-----------------------------------------------------------------)(
WELLS FARGO BANK, N.A.,
Plaintiff,

ORDER ADOPTING REPORT
AND RECOMMENDATION
13-CV-5822 (RRM) (JO)

- against BENJAMIN LANDI and B.W.T. TAILOR SHOP
CORP. ,
Defendants.

------------------------------------------------------------------)(
ROSL YNN R. MAUSKOPF, United States District Judge.
Plaintiff Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. ("We lls Fargo"), brought this foreclosure action on
October 24, 20 13. (Comp!. (Doc. No . 1).) Wells Fargo 's subsequent motion for default
judgment was granted as to defendant Benjamin Landi. (Order and J. (Doc. Nos. 31-32).)
However, the motion was denied as to defendant B. W.T. Tailor Shop Corp. ("BWT"), and Wells
Fargo 's claim against BWT was dismissed w ithout prejudice. (Id.) Wells Fargo subsequently
secured the Court' s permission to fi le an amended complaint against BWT on September 29,
2016. (See 9129120 16 Order.) Since that time, Wells Fargo has not taken any action before the
Court. On December 14, 2016, Magistrate Judge James Orenstein ordered Wells Fargo to fi le a
proposed summons and amended comp laint as to BWT by December 2 1, 2016. (See 12/ 14/2016
Order.) Wells Fargo filed neither the proposed summons and amended complaint nor any other
communication with the Court.
On September 11, 20 17, Judge Orenstein issued a Report and Recommendation
("R&R"), recommending that the Court direct the Clerk of Court to close this inactive case.
(R&R (Doc. No. 37).) Judge Orenstein reminded the parties that, pursuant to Federal Rule of
Civil Procedure ("Rule") 72(b), any objection to the R&R must be fi led no later than September

25, 20 17. (See R&R at 4.) 1 No party has filed any objection, and the time to do so has long
since expired.
Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b) and Rule 72, the Court has reviewed the R&R fo r clear
e1Tor and, finding none, concurs with the R&R in its entirety. See Covey v. Simonton, 48 1 F.
Supp. 2d 224, 226 (E.D.N.Y. 2007).
Accordingly, the Clerk of Court is directed to enter judgment pursuant to this Order and
close the case.

SO ORDERED.

Dated: Brooklyn, New York
~ t s , 2018

s/Roslynn R. Mauskopf
ROSL YNN R. MAUSKOPF
United States District Judge

1

For ease of reference, citations to Court documents utilize the Electronic Case Fi ling System ("ECF") pagination.

2