White v. York et al
DECISION AND ORDER: ORDERED that the Court ADOPTS the Report-Recommendation and Order (dkt. # 24 ) for the reasons stated therein. The defendants' motion for summary judgment (dkt. # 20 ) is GRANTED and the action is DISMISSED. Signed by Senior Judge Thomas J. McAvoy on 3/30/17. (served on plaintiff by regular) (alh, )
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK
NATHAN H. YORK, et al.,
THOMAS J. McAVOY,
Senior United States District Judge
DECISION & ORDER
This pro se action brought pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983 was referred to the Hon.
Daniel J. Stewart, United States Magistrate Judge, for a Report and Recommendation
pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b) and Local Rule 72.3(c). No objections to Magistrate Judge
Stewart’s March 10, 2017 Report-Recommendation and Order [dkt. # 24] have been filed,1
and the time to do so has expired.
After examining the record, this Court has determined that the Report-
Defendants filed a letter, docketed as an objection, indicating that they “agree with the Court’s
decision to dismiss Plaintiff’s Complaint due to the legitimate penological interests of Defendants in denying
Plaintiff’s request for preferred religious meals.” Dkt. # 24. Defendants further contend, however, that “the
record before the Court provides an additional basis for dismissal on the ground that Plaintiff’s religious rights
were not substantially burdened.” Id. Because the Court adopts Magistrate Judge Stewart’s rationale to
dismiss the action, there is no reason to address Defendants’ alternative basis for dismissal.
Recommendation and Order is not subject to attack f or plain error or manifest injustice.
Accordingly, the Court ADOPTS the Report-Recommendation and Order [dkt. # 24]
for the reasons stated therein. The defendants’ motion for summary judgment [dkt. # 20] is
GRANTED and the action is DISMISSED.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated: March 30, 2017
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?