Graham v. Rjm Acquisition LLC

Filing 27

ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS: SO ORDERED that the Court accepts Magistrate Judge Tomlinson's 24 Report and Recommendation in its entirety. This case is dismissed with prejudice for plaintiffs failure to prosecute and the Clerk of Court is directed to close this case. The Clerk of Court shall serve a copy of this order upon all parties, including mailing a copy of this order to the pro se plaintiff, and shall record such service on the docket. CM to pro se plaintiff. Ordered by Judge Sandra J. Feuerstein on 5/21/2012. (Florio, Lisa)

:-

-

.

FILED

IN CLERK'S OFFICE
US DISTRICT COURTED NV

*

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK

----------------------------------------------------------------------)(

TAMICKA GRAHAM,

MAY 21 2012

*

LONG ISLAND OFFICE

Plaintiff,

ORDER
11-CV- 4682 (SJF)(AKT)

-againstRJM ACQUISITION LLC,
Defendant.

----------------------------------------------------------------------)(
FEUERSTEIN, District Judge:
On September 19, 20 II, pro se plaintiff Tamicka Graham ("plaintiff') commenced this
action against the defendant, RJM Acquisition LLC ("defendant"), alleging, inter alia, violations
of the Fair Credit Reporting Act and the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act.
Presently before the Court is the Report and Recommendation (the "Report") of
Magistrate Judge A. Kathleen Tomlinson, dated April24, 2012, recommending that this case be
dismissed for plaintiff's failure to prosecute. [Docket Entry No. 24). No objections to the
Report have been filed. For the following reasons, the Court accepts Magistrate Judge
Tomlinson's Report in its entirety.

I

Any portion of a report and recommendation on dispositive matters to which a timely
objection has been made is reviewed de novo. 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(l); Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b). The
Court, however, is not required to review the factual findings or legal conclusions of the
magistrate judge as to which no proper objections are interposed. See Thomas v. Am, 474 U.S.
I

140, 150, 106 S.Ct. 466, 88 L.Ed.2d 435 (1985). To accept the report and recommendation of a
magistrate judge on a dispositive matter to which no timely objection has been made, the district
judge need only be satisfied that there is no clear error on the face of the record. See Fed. R. Civ.
P. 72(b); Johnson v. Goord, 487 F.Supp.2d 377, 379 (S.D.N.Y. 2007), aff'd, 305 Fed. Appx. 815
(2d Cir. Jan. 9, 2009); Baptichon v. Nevada State Bank, 304 F.Supp.2d 451,453 (E.D.N.Y.
2004), affd, 125 Fed. Appx. 374 (2d Cir. Apr. 13, 2005). Whether or not proper objections have
been filed, the district judge may, after review, accept, reject, or modifY any of the magistrate
judge's findings or recommendations. 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(l); Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b).

II

Neither party has filed any objections to Magistrate Judge Tomlinson's Report. Upon
review, the Court is satisfied that the Report is not facially erroneous. Accordingly, the Court
accepts Magistrate Judge Tomlinson's Report and Recommendation in its entirety. This case is
dismissed with prejudice for plaintiffs failure to prosecute, see Fed. R. Civ. P. 4l(b), and the
Clerk of Court is directed to close this case.
In accordance with Rule 77(d) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, the Clerk of Court
shall serve a copy of this order upon all parties, including mailing a copy of this order to the pro
se plaintiff, and shall record such service on the docket.

2

··SO ORDERED.

s/ Sandra J. Feuerstein
Sandra J. Feuerstein
United States District Judge
Dated:

May 21,2012
Central Islip, New York

3