Friedman v. New York State University of NY at Binghamton

Filing 8

DECISION AND ORDERED, that the Report-Recommendation (Dkt. No. 7) is APPROVED and ADOPTED in its ENTIRETY; and it is further ORDERED, that Plaintiffs Complaint (Dkt. No. 1) is DISMISSED without prejudice for failure to prosecute. Signed by Senior Judge Lawrence E. Kahn on August 27, 2012. (sas)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK
ALICE FRIEDMAN,
Plaintiff,
-against-

5:12-CV-0082 (LEK/DEP)

NEW YORK STATE UNIVERSITY OF
NY AT BINGHAMTON,
Defendant.

DECISION AND ORDER
This matter comes before the Court following a Report-Recommendation filed on June 22,
2012 by the Honorable David E. Peebles, United States Magistrate Judge, pursuant to 28 U.S.C.
§ 636(b). Dkt. No. 7 (“Report-Recommendation”).
Within fourteen days after a party has been served with a copy of a magistrate judge’s reportrecommendation, the party “may serve and file specific, written objections to the proposed findings
and recommendations.” FED . R. CIV . P. 72(b); N.D.N.Y. L.R. 72.1(c). “If no objections are filed . .
. reviewing courts should review a report and recommendation for clear error.” Edwards v. Fischer,
414 F. Supp. 2d 342, 346-47 (S.D.N.Y. 2006) (citations omitted).
Here, no objections have been raised in the allotted time with respect to Magistrate Judge
Peebles’ Report-Recommendation. After examining the record, the Court has determined that the
Report-Recommendation is not subject to attack for clear error or manifest injustice.
Accordingly, it is hereby:
ORDERED, that the Report-Recommendation (Dkt. No. 7) is APPROVED and
ADOPTED in its ENTIRETY; and it is further

ORDERED, that Plaintiff’s Complaint (Dkt. No. 1) is DISMISSED without prejudice for
failure to prosecute; and it is further
ORDERED, that the Clerk of the Court serve a copy of this Decision and Order upon the
parties to this action.
IT IS SO ORDERED.

DATED:

August 27, 2012
Albany, New York

2