Donastorg v. V.C. Vitanza Sons Inc. et al

Filing 60

Memorandum Decision and Order:This action is dismissed with prejudice. Ordered by Judge Ann M. Donnelly on 9/26/2016. (Greene, Donna)

FILED
IN CLERK'S OFFICE
US DISTRICT COURT E.D.N.Y.

5 SEP 2 6 2016

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

^

EASTERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK
X

BROOKLYN OFFICE

RUDOLPH PATRICIO DONASTORG,

Plaintiff,

MEMORANDUM DECISION AND
ORDER

- against 14-CV-5300(AMD)(PK)

V.C. VITANZA SONS INC., V.C. VITANZO
SONS,LLC,ANTHONY POLANCO,TIM
MULLIGAN,LOUIS L. VITANZA,AND C,
THEODORE VITANZA,
Defendants.
X

ANN DONNELLY,District Judge.

The plaintiff, Rudolph Donastorg, brought this employment discrimination action under
Title VII ofthe Civil Rights Act of 1964,the New York State Human Rights Law,and the New

York City Human Rights Law,on September 10, 2014. In a Report and Recommendation issued
on August 8,2016, Magistrate Judge Peggy Kuo recommended that the Court dismiss the action

with prejudice pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(b)for failure to prosecute. No
party has objected to Judge Kuo's Report and Recommendation within the time prescribed by 28
U.S.C. §636(b)(l).

In reviewing an R&R,a district court"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)(1)(C).
Where,as here, no party has objected to the magistrate judge's recommendation,"a district court
need only satisfy itselfthat there is no clear error on the face ofthe record." Urena v. New York,

s/Ann M. Donnelly