Gibson-Hawley v. USA Management LLC et al

Filing 23

MEMORANDUM and ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION: No error, plain or otherwise, appears on the face of the R&R. Accordingly, the Clerk shall enter judgment in accordance with the Report and Recommendation 21 , bearing in mind that the Report and Recommendation provides that the amount of prejudgment interest--and, therefore, the total amount of the judgment--shall be increased by $0.50 per day multiplied by the number of days between September 14, 2018, and the day on which the judgment is entered.Ordered by Judge Frederic Block on 9/28/2018. (Innelli, Michael)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK
----------------------------------------------x
TIFFANY GIBSON-HAWLEY,
Plaintiff,
-against-

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
Case No. 17-CV-4346 (FB) (PK)

USA MANAGEMENT LLC, JOHN
WILLIAMS, TROY LEGG, JOHN
DOES 1-10, JANE DOES 1-10, and
ABC CORPS. 1-10,
Defendants.
----------------------------------------------x
BLOCK, Senior District Judge:
Magistrate Judge Kuo issued a Report and Recommendation (“R&R”)
recommending that a default judgment be entered against defendant Troy Legg in the
total amount of $21,324.38. The R&R advised that objections were due within 14
days and warned that “[f]ailure to timely file any such objection waives the right to
appeal the District Court’s Order.” R&R 24. The R&R was served on Legg at his last
known address on September 14, 2018, making objections due by September 28,
2018. 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 will,
however, 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. Accordingly, the
Clerk shall enter judgment in accordance with the R&R, bearing in mind that the R&R
provides that the amount of prejudgment interest—and, therefore, the total amount of
the judgment—shall be increased by $0.50 per day multiplied by the number of days
between September 14, 2018, and the day on which the judgment is entered.
SO ORDERED.
/S/ Frederic Block_____________
FREDERIC BLOCK
Senior United States District Judge
Brooklyn, New York
September 28, 2018

2