Tompkins v. Artus et al
Filing
103
ORDER: ORDERED, that the Report-Recommendation (Dkt. No. 83 ) is APPROVED and ADOPTED in its entirety. ORDERED, that the Court finds that special circumstances exist excusing Plaintiff Aaron Tompkins's failure to exhaust all administrative remedies as required by 42 U.S.C. § 1992e(a). Signed by Senior Judge Lawrence E. Kahn on 11/27/13. (served on non-ecf party by regular mail) (alh, )
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK
AARON TOMPKINS,
Plaintiff,
-against-
9:10-CV-1200 (LEK/RFT)
C.O. D. BEANE; et al.,
Respondent.
___________________________________
ORDER
This matter comes before the Court following a Report-Recommendation filed on September
27, 2013, by the Honorable Randolph F. Treece, U.S. Magistrate Judge, pursuant to 28 U.S.C.
§ 636(b) and Northern District of New York Local Rule 72.3. Dkt. No. 83 (“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); 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. After a
thorough review of the Report-Recommendation and the record, the Court has determined that the
Report-Recommendation is not subject to attack for clear error or manifest injustice.
Accordingly, it is hereby:
ORDERED, that the Report-Recommendation (Dkt. No. 83) is APPROVED and
ADOPTED in its entirety; and it is further
ORDERED, that the Court finds that special circumstances exist excusing Plaintiff Aaron
Tompkins’s failure to exhaust all administrative remedies as required by 42 U.S.C. § 1992e(a); and
it is further
ORDERED, that the Clerk of the Court serve a copy of this Order upon the parties to this
action.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
DATED:
November 27, 2013
Albany, 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?