Medina v. National Recovery Agency, Inc.
Filing
8
MEMORANDUM and ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION: There being no error the Court adopts MJ Pollak's Report and Recommendation 7 without de novo review and dismisses plaintiffs case for failure to prosecute. The Clerk of the Court shall enter judgment. Ordered by Judge Frederic Block on 1/6/2017. (Innelli, Michael)
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK
--------------------------------------------------x
SHAWANDA MEDINA,
Plaintiff,
-against-
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
16-cv-2569 (FB) (CLP)
NATIONAL RECOVERY AGENCY,
INC.,
Defendant.
--------------------------------------------------x
Appearances:
For Plaintiff:
EDWARD B. GELLER
Edward B. Geller, Esq., P.C.
15 Landing Way
Bronx, NY 10464
BLOCK, Senior District Judge:
On October 4, 2016, Magistrate Judge Cheryl L. Pollack issued a Report and
Recommendation (“R&R”) recommending that plaintiff’s case be dismissed for failure
to prosecute. No objections have been filed to date, and plaintiff’s 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 dismisses plaintiff’s case for failure to prosecute.
SO ORDERED.
/S/ Frederic Block_________
FREDERIC BLOCK
Senior United States District Judge
Brooklyn, New York
January 4, 2016
2
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?