Rodriguez v. Burke et al

Filing 32

ORDER ADOPTING REPORT & RECOMMENDATION for 31 Report and Recommendations, 20 Motion to Dismiss, filed by Mark Miller. Accordingly, for the reasons stated in the R&R, the motion to dismiss the petition as untimely is GRANTED. The Clerk of Court is respectfully directed to terminate Dkt. No. 20 and CLOSE this case. SO ORDERED. (Signed by Judge Margaret M. Garnett on 3/6/2025) (mml) Transmission to Orders and Judgments Clerk for processing.

Case 1:24-cv-02715-MMG-RFT

Document 32

Filed 03/06/25

Page 1 of 2

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK

3/6/2025

ANDRES RODRIGUEZ,
Petitioner,
-againstMARK MILLER,
Respondent.

24-CV-2715 (MMG) (RFT)
ORDER ADOPTING
REPORT &
RECOMMENDATION

MARGARET M. GARNETT, United States District Judge:
On September 25, 2024, this case was referred to Magistrate Judge Robyn F. Tarnofsky
for a report and recommendation on the motion filed at Dkt. No. 20. See Dkt. No. 28. On
February 7, 2025, Magistrate Judge Tarnofsky issued a Report and Recommendation (the
“R&R”) with respect to the motion. See Dkt. No. 31. The R&R notified the parties that,
pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §636(b)(1) and Rule 72(b) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, any
objections to the R&R must be filed within 14 days (in other words, by February 21, 2025). Id.
Despite notification of the right to object to the R&R, no objections were filed. Because
of Petitioner’s pro se status, and his incarceration, the Court has waited approximately two
additional weeks beyond the due date to issue this Order, in order to allow for the potential of
late-filed objections (although in this case the Petitioner has consistently made his filings on time
or even in advance of the due date set by the Court). See Dkt. Nos. 21, 23, 25.
Where no timely objections are made, the Court may adopt the R&R as long as there is
no clear error on the face of the record. Sacks v. Gandhi Eng’g, Inc., 999 F. Supp. 2d 629, 632
(S.D.N.Y. 2014). The Court has carefully reviewed the record and the R&R. 1 As there are no
objections and as the Court finds no clear error in the record, the Court hereby adopts the
R&R in its entirety.
0F

There is one minor clerical error in the R&R, which does not affect the substance of any aspect
of the R&R: in the recitation of the procedural history on page 4, the R&R notes that the Petitioner’s first
opposition to the motion to dismiss was filed on September 22, 2024 at Dkt. No. 23. This is in error, as
that filing was made on September 6, 2024.
1

Case 1:24-cv-02715-MMG-RFT

Document 32

Filed 03/06/25

Page 2 of 2

Accordingly, for the reasons stated in the R&R, the motion to dismiss the petition as
untimely is GRANTED. The Clerk of Court is respectfully directed to terminate Dkt. No. 20 and
CLOSE this case.
Dated: March 6, 2025
New York, New York

SO ORDERED.
MARGARET M. GARNETT
United States District Judge