Goodwin v. Kennedy et al

Filing 65

ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS: SO ORDERED that the Court is satisfied that the Report is not facially erroneous. Accordingly, the Court accepts the Report in its entirety. For the reasons set forth in the Report, defts motion for partial summary judgment is GRANTED. CM to pro se plaintiff. Ordered by Judge Sandra J. Feuerstein on 3/10/2015. (Florio, Lisa)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK
----------------------------------------------------------X
SEAN LARRY GOODWIN,
Plaintiffs,
ORDER
13-CV-1774 (SJF)(AKT)

-againstSUFFOLK COUNTY POLICE DEPARTMENT
P.O. THOMAS KENNEDY #5620,
SUFFOLK COUNTY POLICE DEPARTMENT
DETECTIVE JAMES J. DEMARCO #1397,
Defendants.
----------------------------------------------------------X

FILED 
CLERK 

3/10/2015 11:38 am

U.S. DISTRICT COURT 
EASTERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK 
LONG ISLAND OFFICE 

FEUERSTEIN, J.
Before the Court is Magistrate Judge A. Kathleen Tomlinson’s Report and
Recommendation, dated February 6, 2015, recommending that defendants’ motion for partial
summary judgment be granted and plaintiff’s claim of deliberate indifference to a serious
medical need be dismissed. [Docket Entry No. 62 (the “Report”)]. No objections to the Report
have been filed. For the following reasons, the Court adopts the Report in its entirety.
I.

Standard of Review
Any portion of a report and recommendation on a dispositive matter to which a timely

objection has been made is reviewed by the district court de novo. 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1); 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. Arn, 474 U.S. 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.
1

2007), aff’d, 305 F. App’x 815 (2d Cir. Jan. 9, 2009); Baptichon v. Nev. State Bank, 304 F. Supp.
2d 451, 453 (E.D.N.Y. 2004), aff’d, 125 F. App’x 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)(1); Fed. R. Civ.
P. 72(b).
II.

Analysis
No objections to Magistrate Judge Tomlinson’s Report have been filed and the time to

file objections has passed. Upon review, the Court is satisfied that the Report is not facially
erroneous. Accordingly, the Court accepts the Report in its entirety. For the reasons set forth in
the Report, defendants’ motion for partial summary judgment is GRANTED.

SO ORDERED.

s/ Sandra J. Feuerstein_____
Sandra J. Feuerstein
United States District Judge
Dated: March 10, 2015
Central Islip, New York

2