Winfield v. Bishop et al

Filing 93

ORDER: ORDERED, that the Report-Recommendation (Dkt. No. 92 ) is APPROVED and ADOPTED in its entirety; and it is further ORDERED, that Defendants' Motion (Dkt. No. 77 ) for summary judgment as to the due process claims against Defendant Marocco is GRANTED; and it is further ORDERED, that Defandant Marocco is DISMISSED from this action; and it is further ORDERED, that Defendants' Motion (Dkt. No. 77 ) for summary judgment as to the excessive-force claim against Defendant Bishop is DENIED; and it is further ORDERED, that the Clerk of the Court provide Plaintiff with copies of all unpublished decisions cited in the Report-Recommendation (Dkt. No. 92 ). Signed by Senior Judge Lawrence E. Kahn on 9/3/2013. (ptm) (Copy served on Plaintiff with copies of all unpublished decisions cited in the Report-Recommendation Dkt. No. 92 ).

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK
JOAQUIN R. WINFIELD,
Plaintiff,
-against-

9:09-CV-1055 (LEK/TWD)

WALTER BISHOP; and NANCY
MAROCCO,
Defendants.
___________________________________
ORDER
This action comes before the Court following a Report-Recommendation filed on July 31,
2013, by the Honorable Thérèse Wiley Dancks, U.S. Magistrate Judge, pursuant to 28 U.S.C.
§ 636(b) and Northern District of New York Local Rule 72.3(c). Dkt. No. 92 (“ReportRecommendation”).
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)(2); 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); see also Cephas v. Nash, 328 F.3d 98, 107 (2d Cir.
2003) (“As a rule, a party’s failure to object to any purported error or omission in a magistrate
judge’s report waives further judicial review of the point.”); Farid v. Bouey, 554 F. Supp. 2d 301,
306 (N.D.N.Y. 2008).
No objections to the Report-Recommendation were filed in the allotted time period. See
generally Dkt. After a thorough review of the Report-Recommendation and the record, the Court

has determined that the Report-Recommendation is not clearly erroneous or manifestly unjust.
Accordingly, it is hereby:
ORDERED, that the Report-Recommendation (Dkt. No. 92) is APPROVED and
ADOPTED in its entirety; and it is further
ORDERED, that Defendants’ Motion (Dkt. No. 77) for summary judgment as to the dueprocess claims against Defendant Marocco is GRANTED; and it is further
ORDERED, that Defandant Marocco is DISMISSED from this action; and it is further
ORDERED, that Defendants’ Motion (Dkt. No. 77) for summary judgment as to the
excessive-force claim against Defendant Bishop is DENIED; and it is further
ORDERED, that the Clerk of the Court provide Plaintiff with copies of all unpublished
decisions cited in the Report-Recommendation (Dkt. No. 92); and it is further
ORDERED, that the Clerk of the Court serve a copy of this Order on all parties.
IT IS SO ORDERED.

DATED:

September 03, 2013
Albany, New York

2