Silver v. Salessandro, 15-CV-3462 (ARR) (ST). (2019)
Court: District Court, E.D. New York
Number: infdco20191113c21
Visitors: 8
Filed: Nov. 12, 2019
Latest Update: Nov. 12, 2019
Summary: Opinion & Order Not for electronic or print publication ALLYNE R. ROSS , District Judge . This Court has received the Report and Recommendation on the instant case dated October 28, 2019, from the Honorable Steven L. Tiscione, United States Magistrate Judge. ECF No. 96. No objections have been filed. The Court reviews "de novo any part of the magistrate judge's disposition that has been properly objected to." Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b); see also Brissett v. Manhattan & Bronx Surface Transit Op
Summary: Opinion & Order Not for electronic or print publication ALLYNE R. ROSS , District Judge . This Court has received the Report and Recommendation on the instant case dated October 28, 2019, from the Honorable Steven L. Tiscione, United States Magistrate Judge. ECF No. 96. No objections have been filed. The Court reviews "de novo any part of the magistrate judge's disposition that has been properly objected to." Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b); see also Brissett v. Manhattan & Bronx Surface Transit Ope..
More
Opinion & Order
Not for electronic or print publication
ALLYNE R. ROSS, District Judge.
This Court has received the Report and Recommendation on the instant case dated October 28, 2019, from the Honorable Steven L. Tiscione, United States Magistrate Judge. ECF No. 96. No objections have been filed. The Court reviews "de novo any part of the magistrate judge's disposition that has been properly objected to." Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b); see also Brissett v. Manhattan & Bronx Surface Transit Operating Auth., No. 09-CV-874 (CBA)(LB), 2011 WL 1930682, at *1 (E.D.N.Y. May 19, 2011). Where no timely objections have been filed, "the district court need only satisfy itself that there is no clear error on the face of the record." Finley v. Trans Union, Experian, Equifax, No. 17-CV-0371 (LDH)(LB), 2017 WL 4838764, at *1 (E.D.N.Y. Oct. 24, 2017) (quoting Estate of Ellington ex rel. Ellington v. Harbrew Imports Ltd., 812 F.Supp.2d 186, 189 (E.D.N.Y. 2011)). Having reviewed the record, I find no clear error. I therefore adopt the Report and Recommendation, in its entirety, as the opinion of the Court pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1).
Accordingly, plaintiff's Motion for Relief from an Order or Judgment is denied.
SO ORDERED.
Source: Leagle
