McLaughlin v. Pallito
Filing
24
ENTRY ORDER Adopting 15 Report and Recommendation; denying as moot 9 Motion to Dismiss, without prejudice. Signed by Judge Geoffrey W. Crawford on 11/24/2015. (esb)
u.s. DiS
DISTRIC
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE
DISTRICT OF VERMONT
WILLIAM MCLAUGHLIN,
Plaintiff,
v.
ANDREW PALLITO, NATASHA
METCALF, DAVID FRYE, DOMINIC
DOMATO, RICK BYRNES, DAVID
TURNER, and SGT. JOHNNY PETERS,
Defendants.
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
Case No. 5:15-cv-111
ENTRY ORDER ADOPTING MAGISTRATE JUDGE'S
REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION
(Docs. 9,15)
The Report and Recommendation (R&R) of the United States Magistrate Judge was filed
on October 27,2015, recommending that-in light of Plaintiffs Amended Complaint
(Doc. 13)--Commissioner Pallito's Motion to Dismiss the original Complaint be denied as moot
and without prejudice. (Doc. 15.) Plaintiff has filed an Opposition to the Motion to Dismiss
(Doc. 17), but neither party has filed an objection to the R&R, and the time period for doing so
has expired.
A district judge must make a de novo determination of those portions of a magistrate
judge's report and recommendation to which an objection is made. Fed R. Civ. P. 72(b)(3);
28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1); Cullen v. United States, 194 F.3d 401,405 (2d Cir. 1999). The district
judge may "accept, reject, or modifY, in whole or in part, the findings or recommendations made
by the magistrate judge." 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1); accord Cullen, 194 F.3d at 405.
After careful review of the file and the Magistrate Judge's Report and Recommendation,
this court ADOPTS the Magistrate Judge's recommendations in full for the reasons stated in the
Report. Pallito's Motion to Dismiss (Doc. 9) is DENIED as moot and without prejudice.
SO ORDERED.
Dated at Rutland, in the District of Vermont,
th2- V day of November, 2015.
th
Geoffrey W. Crawford, Judge
United States District Court
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?