Government Employees Insurance Company et al v. Parkway Medical Care, P.C. et al

Filing 80

MEMORANDUM and ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION: The Court adopts MJ Scanlon's Report and Recommendation 79 without de novo review and grants plaintiffs motion for default judgment. Ordered by Judge Frederic Block on 3/24/2017. (Innelli, Michael)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK
--------------------------------------------------x
GOVERNMENT EMPLOYEES
INSURANCE CO., GEICO INDEMNITY
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
CO., GEICO GENERAL INSURANCE
COMPANY, and GEICO CASUALTY
CO.,
15-cv-3670 (FB) (VMS)
Plaintiffs,
-againstPARKWAY MEDICAL CARE, P.C.,
B.Y., M.D., P.C., MK CHIROPRACTIC,
P.C., JR CHIROPRACTIC, P.C., CITY
CARE ACUPUNCTURE, P.C., OLGA
BARD ACUPUNCTURE, P.C., and
OASIS PHYSICAL THERAPY, P.C.,
-andBILLY N. GERIS, M.D., MEHRZAD
KOHANSIEH, D.C., CLEOPHAS
CRAIGG, D.C., ARKADY KINER,
L.A.c., OLGA BARD, L.A.c., and MARY
JEAN ENDOZO, P.T.,
-andDAVID SAFIR, ORION COLLECTIONS,
Defendants.
--------------------------------------------------x
BLOCK, Senior District Judge:
On February 21, 2017, Magistrate Judge Vera M. Scanlon issued a Report and
Recommendation (“R&R”) recommending that plaintiff’s Motion for Default Judgment

be granted against Defendants Parkway Medical, BY MD, JR Chiropractic, Bard
Acupuncture, Ms. Bard, Dr. Craigg, Dr. Geris and Orion Collections (collectively,
“Defaulting Defendants”), and plaintiff be awarded $2,773114.24 in damages, fees, and
costs. No objections have been filed to date, and defendants’ opportunity to object has
passed.
Where 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
must 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). No such error appears here. Accordingly, the Court adopts the
R&R without de novo review and grants plaintiff’s Motion for Default Judgment.

SO ORDERED.
/S/ Frederic Block_________
FREDERIC BLOCK
Senior United States District Judge
Brooklyn, New York
March 24, 2017

2