Matthews v. CSX Transportation

Filing 6

DECISION AND ORDER accepting and adopting # 5 Magistrate Baxter's Report and Recommendation in its entirety. This action shall be sua sponte DISMISSED pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §§ 1915(a)(1) and 1915(e)(2)(B) unless, within THIRTY (30) DA YS of the date of this Decision and Order, Plaintiff files (1) a completed IFP application, and (2) an Amended Complaint that corrects the pleading defects identified in the Report-Recommendation (including, but not limited to, the inclusion of a cop y of any right-to-sue letter from the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission). If Plaintiff files a completed IFP application and an Amended Complaint within the referenced thirty-day period, then the completed IFP application and the Amended Compl aint shall be referred to Magistrate Judge Baxter for his review; if, however, Plaintiff fails to file either a completed IFP form or an Amended Complaint within the referenced thirty-day period, then this action shall be dismissed without further Order of the Court. Signed by Chief Judge Glenn T. Suddaby on 8/29/17. (lmw) (Copy served upon pro se plaintiff via regular mail)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK
_____________________________________________
ROBERT MATTHEWS,
Plaintiff,
5:17-CV-0448
(GTS/ATB)

v.
CSX TRANSPORTATION,
Defendant.
_____________________________________________
APPEARANCES:
ROBERT MATTHEWS
Plaintiff, Pro Se
4770 Boyle Drive
Syracuse, New York 13215
GLENN T. SUDDABY, Chief United States District Judge

DECISION and ORDER
Currently before the Court, in this pro se civil rights action filed by Robert Matthews
(“Plaintiff”) against CSX Transportation (“Defendant”), is United States Magistrate Judge
Andrew T. Baxter’s Report-Recommendation recommending that this action be sua sponte
dismissed pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §§ 1915(a)(1) and 1915(e)(2)(B) unless, within thirty (30) days
of the date of a Decision and Order adopting the Report-Recommendation, Plaintiff files (1) a
completed in forma pauperis (“IFP”) application, and (2) an Amended Complaint that corrects
the pleading defects identified in the Report-Recommendation. (Dkt. No. 5.) Plaintiff has not
filed an objection to the Report-Recommendation, and the deadline in which to do so has
expired. (See generally Docket Sheet.).

After carefully reviewing the relevant papers herein, including Magistrate Judge Baxter’s
thorough Report-Recommendation, the Court can find no clear-error in the ReportRecommendation.1 Magistrate Judge Baxter 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 set forth therein, and this action shall be
dismissed unless, within thirty (30) days of the date of this Decision and Order, Plaintiff files (1)
a completed IFP application, and (2) an Amended Complaint that corrects the pleading defects
identified in the Report-Recommendation.
ACCORDINGLY, it is
ORDERED that Magistrate Judge Baxter’s Report-Recommendation (Dkt. No. 5) is
ACCEPTED and ADOPTED in its entirety; and it is further
ORDERED that this action shall be sua sponte DISMISSED pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §§
1915(a)(1) and 1915(e)(2)(B) unless, within THIRTY (30) DAYS of the date of this Decision
and Order, Plaintiff files (1) a completed IFP application, and (2) an Amended Complaint that
corrects the pleading defects identified in the Report-Recommendation (including, but not
limited to, the inclusion of a copy of any right-to-sue letter from the Equal Employment
Opportunity Commission); and it is further

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

ORDERED that, if Plaintiff files a completed IFP application and an Amended
Complaint within the referenced thirty-day period, then the completed IFP application and the
Amended Complaint shall be referred to Magistrate Judge Baxter for his review; if, however,
Plaintiff fails to file either a completed IFP form or an Amended Complaint within the
referenced thirty-day period, then this action shall be dismissed without further Order of the
Court.
Dated: August 29, 2017
Syracuse, New York
____________________________________
HON. GLENN T. SUDDABY
Chief United States District Judge

3