Young v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue

Filing 15

DECISION and ORDER adopting Report and Recommendations re 10 Report and Recommendations. ORDERED that The Report-Recommendation is adopted in all respects and the matter is referred back to Magistrate Judge Dancks for review of plaintiff's motion to amend. IT IS SO ORDERED. Signed by Judge David N. Hurd on 2/5/2019. (Copy served via regular mail)(khr)

Download PDF
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK -------------------------------KAREEM RASHAWN YOUNG, Plaintiff, -v- 6:18-CV-135 (DNH/TWD) COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE, Defendant. -------------------------------APPEARANCES: KAREEM RASHAWN YOUNG Plaintiff, pro se 04-B-2504 Watertown Correctional Facility PO Box 168 Watertown, NY 13601 DAVID N. HURD United States District Judge DECISION and ORDER Pro se plaintiff Kareem Rashawn Young commenced this action pursuant to 26 U.S.C. § 7422. On October 4, 2018, the Honorable T hérèse Wiley Dancks, United States Magistrate Judge, advised by Report-Recommendation that the complaint be sua sponte dismissed for lack of subject matter jurisdiction without prejudice and that plaintiff be granted leave to amend. No objections to the Report-Recommendation have been filed. However, on October 17, 2018, plaintiff filed an "Affidavit in support of plaintiff's request for leave to amend the complaint that was filed by naming the United States as the proper defendant." ECF No. 13. Based upon a careful review of the entire file and the recommendations of the Magistrate Judge, the Report-Recommendation is accepted in whole. See 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1). Therefore, it is ORDERED that The Report-Recommendation is adopted in all respects and the m atter is referred back to Magistrate Judge Dancks for review of plaintiff's motion to amend. IT IS SO ORDERED. Dated: February 5, 2019 Utica, New York. -2-

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?