Desmarat v. Artus et al

Filing 36

DECISION and ORDER: ORDERED that the 34 Report-Recommendation is accepted and adopted in all respects. Defendants' 17 motion for summary judgment is DENIED; The Magistrate Judge's recommendation that defendants be directed to file a response to the plaintiff's complaint is moot since an answer has been filed. (Docket No. 35). Signed by Judge David N. Hurd on 9/30/2009.{Decision & Order served on Plaintiff via regular mail} (mgh)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK ----------------------------------JEAN MARC DESMARAT, Plaintiff, vs DALE ARTUS, Superintendent; LINDA TURNER, Deputy Superintendent/Program; MICHAEL R. VINCENT, Correction Officer; and JOHN DOE, APPU Inmate/Law Library Clerk, All of Clinton Correctional Facility, Defendant. -----------------------------------APPEARANCES: JEAN MARC DESMARAT 03-A-6318 Clinton Correctional Facility P.O. Box 2001 Dannemora, NY 12929 HON. ANDREW M. CUOMO Attorney General of the State of New York Attorney for Defendants Department of Law The Capitol Albany, New York 12224 DAVID N. HURD United States District Judge DECISION and ORDER Plaintiff, Jean Marc Desmarat, brought this civil rights action in September 2008, pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. By Report-Recommendation dated September 16, 2009, the Honorable Randolph F. Treece, United States Magistrate Judge, recommended defendants' CHRISTOPHER W. HALL,, ESQ. Asst. Attorney General OF COUNSEL: 9:08-CV-977

motion (Docket No. 17) be denied, and that defendants be directed to file a response to plaintiff's complaint. No objections to the Report-Recommendation have been filed. Based upon a careful review of the entire file and the recommendations of Magistrate Judge Treece, the Report-Recommendation is accepted and adopted in all respects. See 28 U.S.C. 636(b)(1). Accordingly, it is ORDERED that 1. Defendants' motion for summary judgment is DENIED; 2. The Magistrate Judge's recommendation that defendants be directed to file a response to the plaintiff's complaint is moot since an answer has been filed. (Docket No. 35). IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: September 30, 2009 Utica, New York.

-2-