Brooks et al v. Help USA et al

Filing 36

(CORRECTED)ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS dated 7/9/18 that Brookss motion for partial entry of final judgmentunder Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 54(b) is GRANTED. ( Ordered by Judge Sterling Johnson, Jr on 7/9/2018 ) *forwarded for jgm. (Guzzi, Roseann)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK
-------------------------------------------------------X
MICHAEL BROOKS and
TRACY PATTERSON,
Plaintiffs

16 CV 2649 (SJ) (RER)

-versus-

ORDER ADOPTING
REPORT AND
RECOMMENDATION

HELP USA et al.,
Defendants.
-------------------------------------------------------X
APPEARANCES
LAW OFFICE OF DEBORAH H. KARPATKIN
99 Park Avenue
Suite 1600
New York, NY 10016
By:
Deborah H. Karpatkin
Attorney for Plaintiffs
JACKSON LEWIS PC
666 Third Avenue
29th Fl
New York, NY 10017
By:
Jason Alan Zoldessy
Sarah Katherine Hook
Attorneys for Defendants
JOHNSON, Senior District Judge:
Presently before the Court is a Report and Recommendation (the “Report”)
prepared by Magistrate Judge Ramon E. Reyes. Judge Reyes issued the Report on
June 13, 2018, and provided the parties with the requisite amount of time to file
objections. None of the parties filed any objections to the Report. For the reasons
stated herein, this Court affirms and adopts the Report in its entirety.
1

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 & Human Servs., 892 F.2d 15, 16 (2d Cir. 1989).

2

In this case, objections to Magistrate Judge Reyes’s recommendation were
due by June 27, 2018. No objections to the Report were filed with this Court. Upon
review of the recommendation, this Court adopts and affirms Magistrate Judge
Reyes’s Report in its entirety. Brooks’s motion for partial entry of final judgment
under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 54(b) is GRANTED.

SO ORDERED.

Dated: July 9, 2018
Brooklyn, NY

_______________/s/______________
Sterling Johnson, Jr., U.S.D.J.

3