O'Diah v. Mawhir et al

Filing 83

DECISION AND ORDER: The 80 Report and Recommendation is accepted and adopted in its entirety. ORDERED that 67 Motion for Summary Judgment is granted as to all claims and all defendants and the complaint dismissed in its entirety and plaintiff's cross-motion for summary judgment be dismissed. Signed by Senior Judge Thomas J. McAvoy on 9/26/12.{order served via regular mail on plaintiff} (nas)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK
__________________________________________
AROR ARK O’DIAH,
Plaintiff,
vs.

9:08-CV-0322

A. MAWHIR, Cayuga Correctional Facility;
P. BUTTARAZZI, Chief Physician, Cayuga
Correctional Facility Inmate Clinic;
JESUS FLORESCA, Chief Physician, Cayuga
Correctional Facility; K. STEVENSON,
Cayuga Correctional Facility Program
Coordinator; MARY WARNER, Nurse Administrator,
Cayuga Correctional Facility,
Defendants.
___________________________________________
Thomas J. McAvoy,
Sr. U.S. District Judge

DECISION & ORDER
This pro se civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983
was referred to the Hon. Christian F. Hummel, United States
Magistrate Judge, for a Report-Recommendation pursuant to 28
U.S.C. § 636(b) and Local Rule N.D.N.Y. 72.3(c).
The Report-Recommendation dated September 5, 2012
recommended: (1) Defendants’ motion for summary judgement be
granted as to all claims and all defendants and the complaint be
dismissed in its entirety; and (2) Plaintiff’s cross-motion for
summary judgment be dismissed.
Plaintiff filed timely objections to the Report-

Recommendation, essentially raising the same arguments presented
to the Magistrate Judge.
When objections to a magistrate judge’s ReportRecommendation are lodged, the Court makes a “de novo
determination of those portions of the report or specified
proposed findings or recommendations to which objection is made.”
See 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1).

After such a review, the Court may

“accept, reject, or modify, in whole or in part, the findings or
recommendations made by the magistrate judge.

The judge may also

receive further evidence or recommit the matter to the magistrate
judge with instructions.”

Id.

Having reviewed the record de novo and having considered the
issues raised in the Plaintiff’s objections, this Court has
determined to accept and adopt in its entirety the recommendation
of Magistrate Judge Hummel for the reasons stated in the ReportRecommendation.
It is therefore ORDERED that Defendants’ motion for summary
judgment be GRANTED as to all claims and all defendants and the
complaint DISMISSED in its entirety, and Plaintiff’s cross-motion
for summary judgment be DISMISSED.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated: September 26, 2012