Lopez v. Ki Moon Restaurant Corp., 17-CV-6078 (LDH) (RLM). (2018)
Court: District Court, E.D. New York
Number: infdco20180711e50
Visitors: 11
Filed: Jul. 10, 2018
Latest Update: Jul. 10, 2018
Summary: ORDER LaSHANN DEARCY HALL , District Judge . On April 24, 2018, United States Magistrate Judge Roanne L. Mann issued a Report and Recommendation recommending that this Court deny Defendants' motion to file an amended answer. The parties were given until May 8, 2018, to file objections to the Report and Recommendation. No objections have been filed. Where no objections to a Report and Recommendation have been filed, "the district court need only satisfy itself that there is no clear error o
Summary: ORDER LaSHANN DEARCY HALL , District Judge . On April 24, 2018, United States Magistrate Judge Roanne L. Mann issued a Report and Recommendation recommending that this Court deny Defendants' motion to file an amended answer. The parties were given until May 8, 2018, to file objections to the Report and Recommendation. No objections have been filed. Where no objections to a Report and Recommendation have been filed, "the district court need only satisfy itself that there is no clear error on..
More
ORDER
LaSHANN DEARCY HALL, District Judge.
On April 24, 2018, United States Magistrate Judge Roanne L. Mann issued a Report and Recommendation recommending that this Court deny Defendants' motion to file an amended answer. The parties were given until May 8, 2018, to file objections to the Report and Recommendation. No objections have been filed. Where no objections to a Report and Recommendation have been filed, "the district court need only satisfy itself that there is no clear error on the face of the record." Estate of Ellington ex rel. Ellington v. Harbrew Imports Ltd., 812 F.Supp.2d 186, 189 (E.D.N.Y. 2011) (quoting Urena v. New York, 160 F.Supp.2d 606, 609-10 (S.D.N.Y. 2001)).
The Court has reviewed the record and the Report and Recommendation for clear error and, finding none, hereby adopts Magistrate Judge Mann's Report and Recommendation in its entirety as the opinion of this Court. Accordingly, Defendants' motion to file an amended answer is DENIED.
SO ORDERED.
Source: Leagle
