KB Insurance Co., Ltd. v. Buffalo Imaging, Inc. et al

Filing 22

MEMORANDUM and ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION: There being no error, plain or otherwise, appears on the face of the Report and Recommendation 20 . Therefore, the Court adopts it without de novo review. The Clerk shall enter a default jud gment declaring that the plaintiff is not obligated to defend or indemnify the defendants in connection with Kippings v. CRS International New York, Inc., Case No. 005540/08 (N.Y. Sup. Ct., Queens Cty.).Ordered by Judge Frederic Block on 1/9/2018. (Innelli, Michael)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK
----------------------------------------------x
KB INSURANCE CO., LTD. (U.S.
BRANCH), f/k/a LEADING
INSURANCE GROUP INSURANCE
COMPANY, LTD. (U.S. BRANCH),

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
Case No. 16-CV-2675-FB-SMG

Plaintiff,
-againstBUFFALO IMAGING, INC., and
CRS INTERNATIONAL NEW YORK,
INC.,
Defendants.
----------------------------------------------x
BLOCK, Senior District Judge:
On September 12, 2017, Magistrate Judge Gold issued a Report and
Recommendation (“R&R”) recommending that a default judgment be entered
declaring that the plaintiff is not obligated to defend or indemnify the defendants in
connection with a personal-injury action filed against them in New York state court.
The R&R advised that objections were due by September 26, 2017, and warned that
“[f]ailure to file timely objections may waive the right to appeal the District Court’s
order.” R&R 5. The R&R was filed the same day and sent by certified and overnight
mail to the defendants’ last known address on September 19, 2017. 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, however,
will 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. Therefore, the
Court adopts it without de novo review. The Clerk shall enter a default judgment
declaring that the plaintiff is not obligated to defend or indemnify the defendants in
connection with Kippings v. CRS International New York, Inc., Case No. 005540/08
(N.Y. Sup. Ct., Queens Cty.).
SO ORDERED.
/S/ Frederic Block_________
FREDERIC BLOCK
Senior United States District Judge
Brooklyn, New York
January 9, 2018

2