Mudun Kotuwage v. Bilt Petroleum Inc. et al

Filing 64

MEMORANDUM and ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION: No error, plain or otherwise, appears on the face of the Report and Recommendation 60 . However, the calculation of prejudgment interest must be updated to include the time since February 8, 2018. Accordingly, the Clerk shall enter judgment in accordance with the Report and Recommendation, except that the amount of prejudgment interest shall be increased by $5.30 per day multiplied by the number of days between February 8, 2018, and the day on which the judgment is entered. Ordered by Judge Frederic Block on 3/7/2018. (Innelli, Michael)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK
----------------------------------------------x
CHANDRASIRI G. MUDUN
KOTUWAGE, individually and in
behalf of all other persons similarly
situated,
Plaintiff,

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
Case No. 15-CV-4374 (FB) (ST)

-againstBILT PETROLEUM, INC.; NSS
PETROLEUM INC; AMRIK S.
DHILLON; and NIRMAL SINGH,
jointly and severally,
Defendants.
----------------------------------------------x
BLOCK, Senior District Judge:
On February 8, 2018, Magistrate Judge Tiscione issued a Report and
Recommendation (“R&R”) recommending that a default judgment be entered against
Amrik S. Dhillon in the total amount of $57,672.75. The R&R advised that objections
were due within 14 days of service and warned that “[f]ailure to file timely objections
shall constitute a waiver of those objections both in the District Court and on later
appeal to the United States Court of Appeals.” R&R 27. The R&R was served on
Dhillon at his last known address on February 20, 2018, making objections due by
March 6, 2018. To date, no objections have been filed.
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.”). The Court will,
however, 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).
No error, plain or otherwise, appears on the face of the R&R. However, the
calculation of prejudgment interest must be updated to include the time since February
8, 2018. Accordingly, the Clerk shall enter judgment in accordance with the R&R,
except that the amount of prejudgment interest shall be increased by $5.30 per day1
multiplied by the number of days between February 8, 2018, and the day on which the
judgment is entered.
SO ORDERED.
/S/ Frederic Block_________
FREDERIC BLOCK
Senior United States District Judge
Brooklyn, New York
March 7, 2018
1

9% annual interest ÷ 365 days × $21,479.63 in principal.
2