Valero v. National Flood Insurance Program

Filing 78

MEMORANDUM & ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS: MJ Pollak's Report and Recommendation 77 contains no error, plain or otherwise. Accordingly, the Court adopts the Report and Recommendation without de novo review and directs the Clerk to dismiss the complaint for plaintiffs failure to prosecute. Ordered by Judge Frederic Block on 10/14/2016. (Innelli, Michael)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK
--------------------------------------------------x
DAVID VALERO,
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
Plaintiff,
14-cv-3362 (FB) (ST)
-againstTHE NATIONAL FLOOD INSURANCE
PROGRAM,
Defendant.
--------------------------------------------------x
Appearances:
For Plaintiff:
SCOTT G. HUNZIKER
The Voss Law Center
26619 Interstate 45
The Woodlands, Texas 77380
BLOCK, Senior District Judge:
On July 13, 2016, Magistrate Judge Cheryl L. Pollak (“MJ”) issued a Report and
Recommendation (“R&R”) recommending that this case be dismissed because of
plaintiff’s failure to prosecute this matter, pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure
41 (“Rule 41”), unless plaintiff contacted the Court within fourteen days. See R&R at 4.
The R&R also provided that failure to object within fourteen days of its receipt would
preclude appellate review. Id. A copy of the R&R was mailed to plaintiff and his
counsel of record on July 13, 2016. To date, no objections have been filed, and ninetysix days have passed.
Where 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.”). This Court, however,
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).
The R&R contains no error, plain or otherwise. Accordingly, the Court adopts
the R&R without de novo review and directs the Clerk to dismiss the complaint for
plaintiff’s failure to prosecute.
SO ORDERED
/S/ Frederic Block_____________
FREDERIC BLOCK
Senior United States District Judge
Brooklyn, New York
October 24, 2016

2