Isigi v. Harry's Nurses Registry et al

Filing 89

MEMORANDUM and ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION: Where there are no objections, the Court may adopt the Report and Recommendation 87 without de novo review. See Thomas v. Arn, 474 U.S. 140, 149-50 (1985); Mario v. P & C Food Mkts., Inc., 31 3 F.3d 758, 766 (2d Cir. 2002) (Where parties receive clear notice of the consequences, failure timely to object to a magistrates report and recommendation operates as a waiver of further judicial review of the magistrates 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 Report and Recommendation without de novo review and enters judgment in the above amount. Ordered by Judge Frederic Block on 4/2/2018. (Innelli, Michael)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK
-------------------------------------------------ROSELYN ISIGI,
Plaintiff,
-against-

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
1:16-cv-2218(FB)(SMG)

HARRY DORVILIER and HARRY’S
NURSES REGISTRY,
Defendants.
-------------------------------------------------Appearances:
For the Plaintiff
JONATHAN A. BERNSTEIN
Levy Davis & Maher LLP
39 Broadway, Suite 1620
New York, NY 10006

For the Defendant
EDWARD IRIZARRY
Law Office of Edward Irizarry, P.C.
260 Madison Ave., 8th Fl.
New York, NY 10016

BLOCK, Senior District Judge:
On September 7, 2017, Magistrate Judge Steven M. Gold issued a Report and
Recommendation (“R&R”) recommending the entry of defendants’ default in this action
for violations of the Fair Labor Standards Act (“FLSA”) and New York Labor Law
(“NYLL”) and state law retaliation. This Court adopted the R&R, ordered entry of a
default judgment, and referred the matter back to Judge Gold for calculation of damages.
On March 14, 2018, Judge Gold issued a second R&R recommending that plaintiff
be awarded $117,318.25 in unpaid overtime wages and $97,510 in liquidated damages
on her FLSA and NYLL claims; $40,412.45 in pre-judgment interest on her NYLL
claims; $12,096 in lost wages, $5,000 in emotional distress damages, and $5,000 in

liquidated damages on her retaliation claim; and $44,890.58 in attorney’s fees and costs.
The R&R instructed that “[a]ny objections to the recommendations contained in this
Report must be filed with the Clerk of the Court within fourteen days of the date of this
Report and in any event no later than March 28, 2018.” 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 enters judgment in the above amount.
SO ORDERED.
_/S/ Frederic Block________
FREDERIC BLOCK
Senior United States District Judge
Brooklyn, New York
April 2, 2018

2