LOCAL #46 METALLIC LATHERS UNION AND REINFORCING IRON WORKERS WELFARE TRUST v. INTEGRATED STRUCTURES, CORP., 11-CV-4159 (FB) (VVP). (2012)
Court: District Court, E.D. New York
Number: infdco20120927a32
Visitors: 6
Filed: Sep. 25, 2012
Latest Update: Sep. 25, 2012
Summary: MEMORANDUM AND ORDER FREDERIC BLOCK, Senior District Judge. On September 6, 2012, Magistrate Judge Pohorelsky issued a Report and Recommendation ("R&R") recommending that the Court deny the plaintiffs' motion for default judgment as originally filed, and deem the motion to have been re-filed as of July 30, 2012, the date upon which the plaintiffs satisfied the procedural requirements for making such a motion. According to the docket, objections were to be filed by September 24, 2012. To date,
Summary: MEMORANDUM AND ORDER FREDERIC BLOCK, Senior District Judge. On September 6, 2012, Magistrate Judge Pohorelsky issued a Report and Recommendation ("R&R") recommending that the Court deny the plaintiffs' motion for default judgment as originally filed, and deem the motion to have been re-filed as of July 30, 2012, the date upon which the plaintiffs satisfied the procedural requirements for making such a motion. According to the docket, objections were to be filed by September 24, 2012. To date, n..
More
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
FREDERIC BLOCK, Senior District Judge.
On September 6, 2012, Magistrate Judge Pohorelsky issued a Report and Recommendation ("R&R") recommending that the Court deny the plaintiffs' motion for default judgment as originally filed, and deem the motion to have been re-filed as of July 30, 2012, the date upon which the plaintiffs satisfied the procedural requirements for making such a motion. According to the docket, objections were to be filed by September 24, 2012. To date, no objections have been filed.
When no objections are filed, the Court reviews an R&R for clear error. See Eisenberg v. New England Motor Freight, Inc., 564 F.Supp.2d 224, 226 (S.D.N.Y. 2008) (district courts may adopt a report and recommendation "to which no [] objection is made, as long as the factual and legal bases supporting the findings and conclusions set forth . . . are not clearly erroneous or contrary to law."). The Court has reviewed the R&R and finds no error, clear or otherwise. The Court therefore adopts the R&R in its entirety and directs the Clerk to enter judgment accordingly.
SO ORDERED.
Source: Leagle
