11-2116-cv Clark v. Town Bd. of the Town of Clarkstown UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SECOND CIRCUIT SUMMARY ORDER RULINGS BY SUMMARY ORDER DO NOT HAVE PRECEDENTIAL EFFECT. CITATION TO A SUMMARY ORDER FILED ON OR AFTER JANUARY 1, 2007, IS PERMITTED AND IS GOVERNED BY FEDERAL RULE OF APPELLATE PROCEDURE 32.1 AND THIS COURT’S LOCAL RULE 32.1.1. WHEN CITING A SUMMARY ORDER IN A DOCUMENT FILED WITH THIS COURT, A PARTY MUST CITE EITHER THE FEDERAL APPENDIX OR AN ELECTRONIC DATABASE (WITH THE NOTATION “SUMMARY ORDER”). A PARTY CITING A SUMMARY ORDER MUST SERVE A COPY OF IT ON ANY PARTY NOT REPRESENTED BY COUNSEL. At a stated Term of the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit, held at the Thurgood Marshall United States Courthouse, 40 Foley Square, in the City of New York, on the 31st day of January, two thousand thirteen, Present: PIERRE N. LEVAL, ROSEMARY S. POOLER, DEBRA ANN LIVINGSTON, Circuit Judges. _____________________________________________________ JOSEPH CLARK, Plaintiff-Appellant, -v- 11-2116-cv TOWN BOARD OF THE TOWN OF CLARKSTOWN, TOWN OF CLARKSTOWN, WILLIAM COLLINS, as former Chief of Police of the Clarkstown Police Department, KEVIN KILDUFF, as former Chief of Police of the Clarkstown Police Department, Defendants-Appellees.* _____________________________________________________ Appearing for Appellant: Maureen McNamara, West Haverstraw, NY Appearing for Appellees: Norma G. Meacham (Christopher M. McDonald, on the brief), Whiteman Osterman & Hanna LLP, Albany, NY Appeal from a judgment of the United States District Court for the Northern District of New York (McAvoy, J.). * The Clerk of the Court is directed to change the caption as set out above.  ON CONSIDERATION WHEREOF, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED, ADJUDGED, AND DECREED that the judgment of said District Court be and it hereby is AFFIRMED. Plaintiff-Appellant Joseph Clark appeals from the district court’s grant of the motion for judgment on the pleadings, entered on January 4, 2011, finding for the Town of Clarkstown Defendants on all claims, and the certification of the case pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 54(b) entering partial final judgment for the Town, entered on April 22, 2011. We assume the parties’ familiarity with the underlying facts, procedural history, and specification of issues for review. The latest date at which Clark alleged action by these Town Defendants was in 1999, with his removal from their payroll following the State’s grant of the Town’s application for retirement disability. The complaint in this case was filed on September 11, 2009. The district court rightly concluded that all of Clark’s allegations against the Town were time-barred by the relevant statutes of limitations. We need not address Clark’s appeal of the Rule 54(b) certification because in the interim the district court entered final judgment dismissing all of Clark’s claims. We find Clark’s remaining arguments to be without merit. Accordingly, the judgment of the district court hereby is AFFIRMED. FOR THE COURT: Catherine O’Hagan Wolfe, Clerk 2