Medrano v. Margiotta et al

Filing 21

ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS: The Court has reviewed the record and, finding no clear error, adopts the R & R as the opinion of the Court. The Court hereby remands this action back to state court. The Clerk of Court is directed to close this case. So Ordered by Judge Joan M. Azrack on 3/3/2017. (Ortiz, Grisel)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK
----------------------------------------------------------------X
In the Matter of the Application of JOSE
MEDRANO,
Petitioner,

For Online Publication Only

ORDER ADOPTING REPORT
AND RECOMMENDATION
15-CV-3704 (JMA)(ARL)

-againstPAUL J. MARGIOTTA, ESQ., Executive Director,
the Suffolk County Traffic and Parking Violation
Agency; ALLEN S. MATHERS, ESQ., a Judicial
Hearing Officer at the Suffolk County Traffic and
Parking Violation Agency; PAUL H. SENZER,
ESQ., a Judicial Hearing Officer at the Suffolk
County Traffic and Parking Violation Agency; and
ADAM HALPERN, ESQ., a Traffic Prosecutor at
the Suffolk County Traffic and Parking Violation
Agency,

FILED 
CLERK 

3/3/2017 4:44 pm

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

Respondents.
------------------------------------------------------------X
AZRACK, United States District Judge:
Petitioner Jose Medrano brings this special proceeding under Article 78 of the N.Y.
C.P.L.R. against the four respondents named above.

The respondents, who removed the

proceeding to this Court, have moved to dismiss. The Court sua sponte directed the parties to
address whether the Court has subject matter jurisdiction over this action. The Court then referred
the motion to dismiss to the Honorable Arlene R. Lindsay, United States Magistrate Judge, for a
report and recommendation. In a Report and Recommendation dated February 16, 2017 (“the
R&R”), Magistrate Judge Lindsay recommended that this removed matter be remanded to state
court.
No party has objected to the R & R, and the time for doing so has passed. When deciding
whether to adopt a report and recommendation, a district court “may accept, reject, or modify, in

1

whole or in part, the findings or recommendations made by the magistrate judge.” 28 U.S.C. §
636(b)(1). “To accept the report and recommendation of a magistrate, to which no timely objection
has been made, a district court need only satisfy itself that there is no clear error on the face of the
record.” Jarvis v. N. Am. Globex Fund, L.P., 823 F. Supp. 2d 161, 163 (E.D.N.Y.2011) (internal
quotation marks and citation omitted). The Court has reviewed the record and, finding no clear
error, adopts the R & R as the opinion of the Court. The Court hereby remands this action back to
state court. The Clerk of Court is directed to close this case.
SO ORDERED.
Date: March 3, 2017
Central Islip, New York
_____/s/ (JMA)___________
Joan M. Azrack
United States District Judge

2