J&J Sports Productions, Inc. v. Hadramout Cafe and Lounge, Inc. et al

Filing 15

ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS: MJ Reyes's Report & Recommendation 13 dated 3/10/14 contains no error, let alone plain error. Accordingly, the Court adopts it without de novo review. While no award shall be made against Sulaiman, t he Clerk shall enter judgment in favor of plaintiff against Mocha Hookah in the total amount of $9,200.00, reflecting: (1) $2,200.00 in actual damages, (2) $6,600 in enhanced damages, and (3) $400 in costs. Ordered by Judge Frederic Block on 4/2/2014. (Innelli, Michael)

Download PDF
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK --------------------------------------------------------x J & J SPORTS PRODUCTIONS, INC., Plaintiff, -against- MEMORANDUM AND ORDER Case No. 13-CV-6233 (FB) (RER) HADRAMOUT CAFÉ AND LOUNGE d/b/a MOCHA HOOKAH and AMMAR SULAIMAN, Defendants. --------------------------------------------------------x BLOCK, Senior District Judge: On March 10, 2014, Magistrate Judge Reyes issued a report and recommendation (“R&R”) recommending that the Court grant plaintiff’s motion for a default judgment in the amount of $9,200.00 against Hadramout Café and Lounge, Inc. d/b/a Mocha Hookah (“Mocha Hookah”), for an unauthorized exhibition of a boxing match to its patrons on November 12, 2011. The R&R also recommended that no judgment be awarded against Ammar Sulaiman (“Sulaiman”) because the plaintiff failed to allege facts establishing any relationship between Sulaiman and Mocha Hookah. The R&R recited that “[a]ny objections to the recommendations made in this Report must be filed . . . within fourteen (14) days of receipt hereof,” and that “[f]ailure to file timely objections may waive the right to appeal the District Court’s Order.” R&R at 9. On March 10, 2014, the R&R was served on defendants, making objections due by March 24, 2014. To date, 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 Thomas v. Arn, 474 U.S. 140, 149-50 (1985); Mario v. P & C Food Mkts., Inc., 313 F.3d 758, 766 (2d Cir. 2002) (“Where parties receive clear notice 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, however, 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). The R&R contains no error, let alone plain error. Accordingly, the Court adopts it without de novo review. While no award shall be made against Sulaiman, the Clerk shall enter judgment in favor of plaintiff against Mocha Hookah in the total amount of $9,200.00, reflecting: (1) $2,200.00 in actual damages, (2) $6,600 in enhanced damages, and (3) $400 in costs. SO ORDERED. _/S/ Frederic Block_________ FREDERIC BLOCK Senior United States District Judge April 2, 2014 Brooklyn, New York 2

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?