Swift v. Time Warner Cable
Filing
49
DECISION AND ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS granting 43 Motion for Summary Judgment; adopting Report and Recommendations re 48 Report and Recommendations. SO ORDERED. Signed by Hon. Lawrence J. Vilardo on 10/2/2019. (APG)-CLERK TO FOLLOW UP-
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
WESTERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK
TOLOAN SWIFT,
Plaintiff,
v.
16-CV-407
DECISION AND ORDER
TWC ADMINISTRATION, LLC,
Defendant.
On May 24, 2016, the plaintiff commenced this action, alleging discrimination and
retaliation against his former employer. Docket Item 1. On July 11, 2016, the
defendant answered the complaint, Docket Item 4, and on July 12, 2016, this Court
referred this case to United States Magistrate Judge Leslie G. Foschio for all pretrial
proceedings under 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(A). Docket Item 6.
The parties then engaged in discovery, including the deposition of the plaintiff.
After the defendant moved for summary judgment, Docket Item 43, on April 5, 2018, this
Court referred this case to Judge Foschio for all proceedings, including a Report and
Recommendation on the defendant’s motion for summary judgment. Docket Item 44.
Four days later, Judge Foschio issued a text order setting May 9, 2018, as the deadline
for the plaintiff to file his response and May 23, 2018, as the deadline for the
defendant’s reply. Docket Item 46. The plaintiff failed to respond to defendant’s motion
for summary judgment by the deadline, but on May 18, 2018, the defendant replied.
Docket Item 48.
On July 9, 2019, Judge Foschio issued a Report and Recommendation ("R&R"),
finding that the defendant’s motion should be granted. Docket Item 48. The parties did
not object to the R&R, and the time to do so now has expired. See 28 U.S.C.
§ 636(b)(1); Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b)(2).
A district court may accept, reject, or modify the findings or recommendations of
a magistrate judge. 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1); Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b)(3). A district court
must conduct a de novo review of those portions of a magistrate judge’s
recommendation to which a party objects. 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1); Fed. R. Civ.
P. 72(b)(3). But neither 28 U.S.C. § 636 nor Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 72
requires a district court to review the recommendation of a magistrate judge to which no
objections are raised. See Thomas v. Arn, 474 U.S. 140, 149-50 (1985).
Although not required to do so in light of the above, this Court nevertheless has
reviewed Judge Foschio's R&R as well as the parties’ submissions to him. Based on
that review and the absence of any objections, the Court accepts and adopts
Judge Foschio's recommendation to grant the defendant's motion.
2
For the reasons stated above and in the R&R, the defendant's motion for
summary judgment, Docket Item 43, is GRANTED. The Clerk of the Court shall close
the file.
SO ORDERED.
Dated:
October 2, 2019
Buffalo, New York
s/ Lawrence J. Vilardo
LAWRENCE J. VILARDO
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
3
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?