Transaero, Inc. v. Graham Chappell et al

Filing 63

ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS : IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that plaintiff is awarded damages in the amount of $128,688.95 with regard to Signature, and damages in the amount of $134,661.79 with regard to CEP, for a total judgment of & #036;263,350.74. Additionally, the claim for damages based upon Chappell's conduct in 2009 and the claim for attorney's fees are denied without prejudice. Plaintiff shall have thirty (30) days from the date of this Order to renew its motion as to only those two issues.. Ordered by Judge Joseph F. Bianco on 3/9/2016. (Bollbach, Jean)

FIlE 0

.
IN CLERK'S OFF
(,; S. Di3TRICT COURi~'b.N.Y.

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK

*

---------------------------------------------------------------){

TRANSAERO, INC.,

NAR 09 2016

*

LONG ISLAND OFFICE

Plaintiff,
ORDER
13-CV-5752 (JFB)(AYS)

-againstGRAHAM CHAPPELL and INTERNATIONAL
AVIATION SERVICES PTY, LTD.,
Defendants.

---------------------------------------------------------------){

JOSEPH F. BIANCO, District Judge:

Before the Court is a Report and Recommendation ("R&R") from Magistrate Judge
Sheilds, advising the Court regarding the award of damages and attorney's fees. The R&R
instructed that any objections to the R&R be submitted within fourteen (14) days of service of the
R&R. (See R&R, dated February 12, 2016, at 13.) On February 17,2016, plaintiff filed a motion
to alter the judgment. (See ECF No. 62.) On February 19, 2016, Magistrate Judge Shields denied
the motion as improper and directed plaintiff to make any objections directly to this Court within
the time period permitted by statute. The date for filing any objections has since expired, and
plaintiff has not filed any objection to the R&R with this Court. For the reasons set forth below,
the Court adopts the thorough and well-reasoned R&R in its entirety.
Where there are no objections, the Court may adopt the report and recommendation without
de novo review. See Thomas v. Arn, 474 U.S. 140, 150 (1985) ("It does not appear that Congress

intended to require district court review of a magistrate's factual or legal conclusions, under a de
novo or any other standard, when neither party objects to those fmdings."); see also 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."); cf 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(l)(c) and
Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b)(3) (requiring de novo review after objections). However, because the failure
to file timely objections is not jurisdictional, a district judge may still excuse the failure to object
in a timely manner and exercise its discretion to decide the case on the merits to, for example,
prevent plain error. See Cephas v. Nash, 328 F.3d 98, I 07 (2d Cir. 2003) ("[B]ecause the waiver
rule is non jurisdictional, we 'may excuse the default in the interests ofjustice.'" (quoting Thomas,
474 U.S. at 155)).
Although plaintiff has waived any objection to the R&R and thus de novo review is not
required, the Court has conducted a de novo review of the R&R in an abundance of caution.
Having conducted a review of the full record and the applicable law, and having reviewed the
R&R de novo, the Court adopts the findings and recommendations contained in the well-reasoned
and thorough R&R in their entirety. Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that plaintiff is
awarded damages in the amount of $128,688.95 with regard to Signature, and damages in the
amount of$134,661.79 with regard to CEP, for a total judgment of$263,350.74. Additionally, the
claim for damages based upon Chappell's conduct in 2009 and the claim for attorney's fees are
denied without prejudice. Plaintiff shall have thirty (30) days from the date of this Order to renew
its motion as to only those two issues.
SO ORDERED

EP F.BIANCO
ITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
Dated: March 9, 2016
Central Islip, New York