Trustees of the Local 7 Tile Industry Welfare Fund, the Local 7 Tile Industry Annuity Fund, and the Tile Layers Local Union 52 Pension Fund et al v. Sesso Tile & Stone Contractors, Inc. et al

Filing 33

ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION. See attached. The parties are directed to proceed to discovery. Ordered by Judge Sterling Johnson, Jr on 9/2/2016. (Figeroux, Davina)

Download PDF
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK -------------------------------------------------------X TRUSTEES OF THE LOCAL 7 TILE INDUSTRY WELFARE FUND, et al., Plaintiffs, 15 CV 6124 (SJ) (RML) -against- ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION SESSO TILE & STONE CONTRACTORS, INC. et al., Defendants. -------------------------------------------------------X APPEARANCES VIRGINIA AND AMBINDER LLP 40 Broad Street 7th Floor New York, NY 10004 By: Jonathan Roffe Todd Dickerson Nicole Marimon Attorneys for Plaintiffs MILMAN LABUDA LAW GROUP PLLC 3000 Marcus Avenue Suite 3W8 Lake Success, NY 11042 By: Robert F. Milman Emanuel Kataev Attorneys for Defendants JOHNSON, Senior District Judge: Presently before the Court is a Report and Recommendation (“Report”) prepared by Magistrate Judge Robert Levy. Judge Levy issued the Report on 1 August 18, 2016, and provided the parties until September 1, 2016 to file any objections. Neither party filed any objections to the Report. For the reasons stated herein, this Court affirms and adopts the Report in its entirety. A district court judge may designate a magistrate judge to hear and determine certain motions pending before the Court and to submit to the Court proposed findings of fact and a recommendation as to the disposition of the motion. See 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1). Within 10 days of service of the recommendation, any party may file written objections to the magistrate’s report. See id. Upon de novo review of those portions of the record to which objections were made, the district court judge may affirm or reject the recommendations. See id. The Court is not required to review, under a de novo or any other standard, the factual or legal conclusions of the magistrate judge as to those portions of the report and recommendation to which no objections are addressed. See Thomas v. Arn, 474 U.S. 140, 150 (1985). In addition, failure to file timely objections may waive the right to appeal this Court=s Order. See 28 U.S.C. ' 636(b)(1); Small v. Sec=y of Health and Human Servs., 892 F.2d 15, 16 (2d Cir. 1989). In this case, objections to Magistrate Judge Levy’s recommendations were due on September 1, 2016. No objections to the Report were filed with this Court. Upon review of the recommendations, this Court adopts and affirms Magistrate Judge Levy’s Report in its entirety. The parties are directed to proceed with discovery before Judge Levy. 2 SO ORDERED. Dated: September 2, 2016 Brooklyn, NY _________/s/___________________ Sterling Johnson, Jr., U.S.D.J. 3

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?