Figuereo v. Felton et al
Filing
6
DECISION AND ORDER that Magistrate Judge Stewart's Report-Recommendation (Dkt. No. 5 ) is ACCEPTED and ADOPTED in its entirety. Plaintiff's Complaint (Dkt. No. 1 ) shall be DISMISSED with prejudice and without further Order of this Cou rt UNLESS, within THIRTY (30) DAYS of entry of this Decision and Order, Plaintiff files an AMENDED COMPLAINT that cures the pleading defects identified in the Report-Recommendation. Should Plaintiff wish to file an Amended Complaint in this matter , the Amended Complaint must be a complete pleading which will supercede and replace his original Complaint in all respects. Should Plaintiff file a timely Amended Complaint, the Amended Complaint shall be returned to Magistrate Judge Stewart for further review pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915. Signed by U.S. District Judge Glenn T Suddaby on 8/28/2024. (Copy served upon plaintiff via regular mail) (sal)
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK
______________________________________________
ALEXIS FIGUEREO,
Plaintiff,
1:24-CV-0556
(GTS/DJS)
v.
MARCUS FELTON, Police Officer;
GRIFFIN CLARK, Albany Police Officer;
ALAN WOJEWODZIC, Sergeant;
ROBERT LAWYER, Detective;
PJ O’DONOVAN, Detective;
THE CITY OF ALBANY; and
JOHN DOES OFFICERS, Albany Police Dept.,
Defendants.
______________________________________________
APPEARANCES:
ALEXIS FIGUEROA
Plaintiff, Pro Se
60 Henry Street
Saratoga Springs, New York 12866
GLENN T. SUDDABY, United States District Judge
DECISION and ORDER
Currently before the Court, in this pro se civil rights action filed by Alexis Figueroa
(“Plaintiff”) against the City of Albany and certain employees of the Albany Police Department
(“Defendants”), is United States Magistrate Judge Daniel J. Stewart’s Report-Recommendation
recommending that Plaintiff’s Complaint be sua sponte dismissed with leave to amend pursuant
to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B). (Dkt. No. 5.) Plaintiff has not filed an Objection to the ReportRecommendation and the time in which to do so has expired. (See generally Docket Sheet.)
After carefully reviewing the relevant papers herein, including Magistrate Judge Stewart’s
thorough Report-Recommendation, the Court can find no clear error in the ReportRecommendation:1 Magistrate Judge Stewart employed the proper standards, accurately recited
the facts, and reasonably applied the law to those facts. As a result, the Report-Recommendation
is accepted and adopted in its entirety for the reasons stated therein.
ACCORDINGLY, it is
ORDERED that Magistrate Judge Stewart’s Report-Recommendation (Dkt. No. 5) is
ACCEPTED and ADOPTED in its entirety; and it is further
ORDERED that Plaintiff’s Complaint (Dkt. No. 1) shall be DISMISSED with prejudice
and without further Order of this Court UNLESS, within THIRTY (30) DAYS of entry of this
Decision and Order, Plaintiff files an AMENDED COMPLAINT that cures the pleading defects
identified in the Report-Recommendation; and it is further
ORDERED that, should Plaintiff wish to file an Amended Complaint in this matter, the
Amended Complaint must be a complete pleading which will supercede and replace his original
Complaint in all respects; and it is further
ORDERED that, should Plaintiff file a timely Amended Complaint, the Amended
Complaint shall be returned to Magistrate Judge Stewart for further review pursuant to 28 U.S.C.
§ 1915.
1
When no objection is made to a report-recommendation, the Court subjects that
report-recommendation to only a clear error review. Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b), Advisory Committee
Notes: 1983 Addition. When performing such a “clear error” review, “the court need only satisfy
itself that there is no clear error on the face of the record in order to accept the recommendation.”
Id.; see also Batista v. Walker, 94-CV-2826, 1995 WL 453299, at *1 (S.D.N.Y. July 31, 1995)
(Sotomayor, J.) (“I am permitted to adopt those sections of [a magistrate judge’s] report to which
no specific objection is made, so long as those sections are not facially erroneous.”) (internal
quotation marks omitted).
2
Dated: August 28, 2024
Syracuse, New York
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?