Speedfit LLC et al v. Chapco Inc. et al

Filing 34

ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS: The Court affirms and adopts the well-reasoned Report and Recommendation in its entirety as the opinion of the Court and grants in part and denies defendants motion to dismiss the complaint. So Ordered by Judge Joan M. Azrack on 9/30/2016. (Ortiz, Grisel)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------X
SPEEDFIT LLC and AUREL A. ASTILEAN,

ORDER
15–CV–1323 (JMA)(SIL)

Plaintiffs,
-against-

CHAPCO INC., ROBERT WEINSTEIN,
BRIAN WEINSTEIN, and SAMSARA
FITNESS LLC,
Defendants.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------X

FILED 
CLERK 

9/30/2016 4:10 pm

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

AZRACK, United States District Judge:
Before the Court are objections submitted by the parties to Magistrate Judge Locke’s
Report recommending that the Court deny in part and grant in part defendants’ motion to dismiss.
The parties timely objected to the Report. Having conducted a review of the full record and the
applicable law, for the following reasons, the Court adopts Judge Locke’s Report and
Recommendation in its entirety.
In reviewing a magistrate judge’s report and recommendation, the court must “make a de
novo determination of those portions of the report or . . . recommendations to which
objection[s][are] made.” 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C); see also Brown v. Ebert, No. 05–CV–5579,
2006 WL 3851152, at *2 (S.D.N.Y. Dec. 29, 2006). The court “may accept, reject, or modify, in
whole or in part, the findings or recommendations made by the magistrate judge.” 28 U.S.C. §
636(b)(1)(C). Those portions of the Report to which there is no specific reasoned objection are
reviewed for clear error. See Pall Corp. v. Entegris, Inc., 249 F.R.D. 48, 51 (E.D.N.Y. 2008). The
Court considers each of the parties’ objections de novo. The court has reviewed the remainder of
1

Judge Locke’s recommendations to which the parties did not object for clear error, and finding
none, adopts those findings.
The Court affirms and adopts the well-reasoned Report and Recommendation in its entirety
as the opinion of the Court and grants in part and denies defendants’ motion to dismiss the
complaint.
SO ORDERED.
Dated: September 30, 2016
Central Islip, New York

/s/
JMA
JOAN M. AZRACK
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

2