Callejas et al v. Hitano Services, Inc.
Filing
22
MEMORANDUM OF DECISION & ORDER: It has been more than fourteen days since the service of the R&R, and the parties have not filed objections. As such, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b) and Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 72, this Court has reviewed the R&R for clear error, and finding none, now concurs in both its reasoning and its result. See Coburn v. P.N. Fin., No. 13-CV-1006 (ADS) (SIL), 2015 WL 520346, at *1 (E.D.N.Y. Feb. 9, 2015) (reviewing Report and Recommendation without objections fo r clear error). Accordingly, the R&R is adopted in its entirety. This case is dismissed for failure to prosecute. The Clerk of the Court is respectfully directed to enter judgment and close the case. SEE ATTACHED DECISION for details. Ordered by Judge Arthur D. Spatt on 10/11/2018. (Coleman, Laurie)
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK
---------------------------------------------------------X
ALAN CALLEJAS, CARLOS FLORES, and
JOSE ROSALES, on behalf of themselves and
all others similarly situated,
Plaintiffs,
FILED
CLERK
9:47 am, Oct 11, 2018
U.S. DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK
LONG ISLAND OFFICE
MEMORANDUM OF
DECISION & ORDER
2:15-cv-01123 (ADS) (GRB)
-againstHITANO SERVICES, INC. D/B/A ACTION
BUILDING SERVICES, and EDUARDO
PEREZ, individually,
Defendants.
---------------------------------------------------------X
APPEARANCES:
Law Office of Jose G. Santiago, Esq.
Counsel for the Plaintiffs
3275 Veterans Memorial Hwy., Ste. 15
Ronkonkoma,, NY 11779
By:
Jose G. Santiago, Esq., Of Counsel.
SPATT, District Judge:
The complaint in this action was filed on March 4, 2015. The Plaintiffs moved for a default
judgment on February 18, 2016.
On February 19, 2016, the Court referred the matter to United States Magistrate Judge Gary
R. Brown for a recommendation as to whether the motion for a default judgment should be granted,
and if so, (1) whether damages should be awarded, including reasonable attorney's fees and costs,
and (2) whether any other relief should be granted.
On August 10, 2016, Judge Brown issued a Report and Recommendation recommending
(1) a default judgment be entered in favor of the Plaintiffs and against the Defendants, and (2)
denying the motion for damages without prejudice to renew.
1
On September 30, 2016, the Court adopted the Report and Recommendation and granted
the Plaintiffs leave to file a renewed motion for damages within thirty days of the order.
On January 10, 2017, Judge Brown initiated a status report request for failure to prosecute
resulting in a status letter, ECF 21, filed on February 7, 2017 in which the Plaintiffs requested an
inquest.
On July 31, 2017 the request was denied without prejudice and the Plaintiffs were directed
to file a motion for damages by October 1, 2017. The Plaintiffs were also cautioned that failure to
file the motion would result in a recommendation that the case be dismissed for failure to
prosecute. A Status Report Order and a Second and Final Status Report Order were issued on April
5, 2018 and May 3, 2018 respectively, with warnings that failure to respond may result in a report
and recommendation that the case be dismissed for failure to prosecute. A review of the docket
shows that no action has been taken to prosecute this action since February 7, 2017.
Based on these facts, on September 25, 2018, Judge Brown recommended to the Court that
the above matter be dismissed for failure to prosecute, the Clerk of the Court enter judgment and
the case be closed. A copy of the Report and Recommendation was provided to the Plaintiff’s
counsel via ECF.
It has been more than fourteen days since the service of the R&R, and the parties have not
filed objections.
As such, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b) and Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 72, this Court
has reviewed the R&R for clear error, and finding none, now concurs in both its reasoning and its
result. See Coburn v. P.N. Fin., No. 13-CV-1006 (ADS) (SIL), 2015 WL 520346, at *1 (E.D.N.Y.
Feb. 9, 2015) (reviewing Report and Recommendation without objections for clear error).
2
Accordingly, the R&R is adopted in its entirety. This case is dismissed for failure to
prosecute. The Clerk of the Court is respectfully directed to enter judgment and close the case.
SO ORDERED.
Dated: Central Islip, New York
October 11, 2018
___/s/ Arthur D. Spatt_______
ARTHUR D. SPATT
United States District Judge
3
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
Why Is My Information Online?