Elawyers Elawyers
Ohio| Change

FINKEL v. RICO ELECTRIC, INC., 11 CV 4232 (SJ) (CLP). (2012)

Court: District Court, E.D. New York Number: infdco20121219795 Visitors: 22
Filed: Dec. 17, 2012
Latest Update: Dec. 17, 2012
Summary: ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION STERLING JOHNSON, Senior District Judge. Presently before the Court is a Report and Recommendation ("Report") prepared by Magistrate Judge Cheryl L. Pollak. Judge Pollak issued the Report on October 1, 2012, and provided the parties with the requisite amount of time to file any objections. Neither party filed any objections to the Report. For the reasons stated herein, this Court affirms and adopts the Report in its entirety. A district court judge may
More

ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION

STERLING JOHNSON, Senior District Judge.

Presently before the Court is a Report and Recommendation ("Report") prepared by Magistrate Judge Cheryl L. Pollak. Judge Pollak issued the Report on October 1, 2012, and provided the parties with the requisite amount of time to file any objections. Neither party filed any objections to the Report. For the reasons stated herein, this Court affirms and adopts the Report in its entirety.

A district court judge may designate a magistrate judge to hear and determine certain motions pending before the Court and to submit to the Court proposed findings of fact and a recommendation as to the disposition of the motion. See 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1). Within 10 days of service of the recommendation, any party may file written objections to the magistrate's report. See id. Upon de novo review of those portions of the record to which objections were made, the district court judge may affirm or reject the recommendations. See id. The Court is not required to review, under a de novo or any other standard, the factual or legal conclusions of the magistrate judge as to those portions of the report and recommendation to which no objections are addressed. See Thomas v. Arn, 474 U.S. 140, 150 (1985). In addition, failure to file timely objections may waive the right to appeal this Court's Order. See 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1); Small v. Sec'y of Health and Human Servs., 892 F.2d 15, 16 (2d Cir. 1989).

In this case, objections to Magistrate Judge Pollak's recommendations were due on October 18, 2012. No objections to the Report were filed with this Court. Upon review of the recommendations, this Court adopts and affirms Magistrate Judge Pollak's Report in its entirety. The Clerk of the Court is directed to close the case.

SO ORDERED.

Source:  Leagle

Can't find what you're looking for?

Post a free question on our public forum.
Ask a Question
Search for lawyers by practice areas.
Find a Lawyer