40-46 Main Street Realty Corp. et al v. The City of New York et al

Filing 22

ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION. See attached. The Clerk of the Court is directed to close the case. Ordered by Judge Sterling Johnson, Jr on 1/10/2018. (Figeroux, Davina)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK
-------------------------------------------------------X
40-46 MAIN STREET REALTY CORP., et al.,
Plaintiffs,
16 CV 6900 (SJ) (SJB)
-against-

ORDER ADOPTING
REPORT AND
RECOMMENDATION

CITY OF NEW YORK, et al.,
Defendants.
-------------------------------------------------------X
APPEARANCES
KEVIN K.TUNG
136-20 38th Avenue
Suite 3D
Flushing, NY 11354
By:
Kevin K. Tung
Attorney for Plaintiffs
OFFICE OF THE CORPORATION COUNSEL
100 Church Street
Room 3-118
New York, NY 10007
By:
William H. Vidal
Attorneys for Defendant City of New York
and New York City Housing Preservation
and Development
PECKAR & ABRAMSON
41 Madison Avenue
20th Floor
New York, NY 10010
By:
Howard M. Rosen
Attorneys for Monadnock Development LLC

JOHNSON, Senior District Judge:
1

Presently before the Court is a Report and Recommendation (“Report”)
prepared by Magistrate Judge Sanket J. Bulsara. Judge Bulsara issued the Report on
November 27, 2017, and provided the parties with the requisite amount of time 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 Bulsara=s recommendations were
due on December 11, 2017. No objections to the Report were filed with this Court.
Upon review of the recommendations, this Court adopts and affirms Magistrate

2

Judge Bulsara’s Report in its entirety. The Clerk of the Court is directed to close
the case.

SO ORDERED.
Dated: January 10, 2018
Brooklyn, NY

_________/s/___________________
Sterling Johnson, Jr., U.S.D.J.

3