Cintron v. Gettmann et al

Filing 36

ORDER adopting 35 Report and Recommendations and granting 33 Motion to Dismiss. Plaintiff's Amended Complaint is Dismissed without prejudice. Signed by Judge Brenda K. Sannes on 5/25/17. (Copy served on plaintiff via regular and certified mail)(rjb, )

Download PDF
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK ______________________________________________________ DAVID CINTRON, Plaintiff, v. 9:15-CV-0542 (BKS/TWD) GARY GETTMANN, et al., Defendants. ________________________________________________ Appearances: David Cintron Bronx, NY 14060 Plaintiff, pro se Rachel M. Kish, Esq. Hon. Eric T. Schneiderman Office of New York State Attorney General The Capitol Albany, NY 12224 Attorney for Defendants Hon. Brenda K. Sannes, United States District Judge: MEMORANDUM-DECISION AND ORDER Plaintiff David Cintron, a former New York State inmate, commenced this civil rights action asserting claims under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 arising out of his incarceration at Upstate Correctional facility. Dkt. Nos. 1 and 14. On October 17, 2016, Defendants filed a motion under Fed. R. Civ. P. 37(b) and 41(b) for sanctions against plaintiff and for dismissal of the complaint for lack of prosecution. Dkt. No. 33. Plaintiff has not responded to Defendants’ motion. This matter was assigned to United States Magistrate Judge Thérèse Wiley Dancks who, on May 1, 2017, issued an Order and Report-Recommendation recommending that Defendants’ motion to dismiss be granted, without prejudice. Dkt. No. 35. Magistrate Judge Dancks advised the parties that under 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1), they had fourteen days within which to file written objections to the report, and that the failure to object to the report within fourteen days would preclude appellate review. Dkt. No. 35, p. 9. No objections to the ReportRecommendation have been filed. As no objections to the Report-Recommendation have been filed, and the time for filing objections has expired, the Court reviews the Report-Recommendation for clear error. See Petersen v. Astrue, 2 F. Supp. 3d 223, 228-29 (N.D.N.Y. 2012); Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b) advisory committee’s note to 1983 amendment. Having reviewed the Report-Recommendation for clear error and found none, the Report-Recommendation is adopted in its entirety. For these reasons, it is ORDERED that the Report-Recommendation (Dkt. No. 35) is ADOPTED in its entirety; and it is further ORDERED that Defendants’ motion to dismiss (Dkt. No. 33) is GRANTED and Plaintiff’s Amended Complaint is DISMISSED, without prejudice; and it is further ORDERED that the Clerk serve a copy of this Order upon the parties in accordance with the Local Rules. IT IS SO ORDERED. Dated: May 25, 2017 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?