Figueroa v. Holmes et al

Filing 27

ORDER: ORDERS that Magistrate Judge Baxter's September 20, 2013 25 Report- Recommendation is ACCEPTED in its entirety for the reasons stated therein; and the Court further ORDERS that Defendants' 10 motion to dismiss is GRANTED with r espect to Plaintiff's retaliation claims and DENIED with respect to Plaintiff's claim that Defendants were deliberately indifferent to his serious medical needs; and the Court further ORDERS that this matter is referred to Magistrate Jud ge Baxter for all further pretrial matters; and the Court further ORDERS that the Clerk of the Court shall serve a copy of this Order on the parties in accordance with the Local Rules. Signed by Senior Judge Frederick J. Scullin, Jr on 10/18/2013. (ptm) (Copy served on plaintiff by regular mail)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK
___________________________________________________
JULIO FIGUEROA,
Plaintiff,
v.

9:13-CV-48
(FJS/ATB)

MS. HOLMES, Registered Nurse, Upstate Correctional
Facility; MS. N. SMITH, Nurse Administrator, Upstate
Correctional Facility; and MR. PARMER, Nurse
Practitioner, Upstate Correctional Facility;
Defendants.
__________________________________________________
APPEARANCES

OF COUNSEL

JULIO FIGUEROA
05-A-4469
Upstate Correctional Facility
P. O. Box 2001
Malone, New York 12953
Plaintiff pro se
OFFICE OF THE NEW YORK
STATE ATTORNEY GENERAL
The Capitol
Albany, New York 12224
Attorneys for Defendants

CHARLES J. QUACKENBUSH, AAG

SCULLIN, Senior Judge
ORDER
Currently before the Court is Magistrate Judge Baxter's September 20, 2013 ReportRecommendation, in which he recommended that this Court grant Defendants’ motion to dismiss
for failure to state a claim with regard to Plaintiff’s retaliation claims and deny their motion with
with respect to Plaintiff’s claim that Defendants were deliberately indifferent to his serious
medical needs. See Dkt. 25 at 12. Plaintiff filed a letter dated October 2, 2013, stating that he

does not object to the September 20, 2013 Report-Recommendation. See Dkt. 26. Defendants
did not file any objections to these recommendations.
When a party does not object to a magistrate judge’s report-recommendation, the court
reviews that report-recommendation for clear error or manifest injustice. See Linares v.
Mahunik, No. 9:05-CV-625, 2009 WL 3165660, *10 (N.D.N.Y. July 16, 2009) (citation and
footnote omitted). After conducting this review, “the Court may ‘accept, reject, or modify in
whole or in part, the . . . recommendations made by the magistrate judge.’” Id. (quoting 28
U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C)).
The Court has reviewed Magistrate Judge Baxter's September 20, 2013 ReportRecommendation for clear error and manifest injustice; and, finding none, the Court hereby
ORDERS that Magistrate Judge Baxter’s September 20, 2013 Report-Recommendation
is ACCEPTED in its entirety for the reasons stated therein; and the Court further
ORDERS that Defendants’ motion to dismiss is GRANTED with respect to Plaintiff’s
retaliation claims and DENIED with respect to Plaintiff’s claim that Defendants were
deliberately indifferent to his serious medical needs; and the Court further
ORDERS that this matter is referred to Magistrate Judge Baxter for all further pretrial
matters; and the Court further
ORDERS that the Clerk of the Court shall serve a copy of this Order on the parties in
accordance with the Local Rules.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated: October 18, 2013
Syracuse, New York

-2-