ORDER

FREDERICK J. SCULLIN, Jr. Senior District Judge.

Plaintiff commenced this action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983, alleging deprivation of his civil rights. Specifically, with respect to the two Defendants remaining in this action, Plaintiff asserted that they conspired to, and did, issue him a false misbehavior report in retaliation for his filing grievances and a lawsuit against DOCCS officials.

Following the close of discovery, Defendants filed a motion for summary judgment, see Dkt. No. 103, which Plaintiff opposed, see Dkt. No. 127. On August 28, 2014, Magistrate Judge Peebles issued a Report and Recommendation, in which he denied Defendants' motion with leave to renew after the close of discovery. See Dkt. No. 145. The parties did not file any objections to Magistrate Judge Peebles' recommendation.

When a party does not object to a magistrate judge's report-recommendation, the court reviews that report-recommendation for clear error or manifest injustice. See Linares v. Mahunik, No. 9:05-CV-625, 2009 WL 3165660, *10 (N.D.N.Y. July 16, 2009) (citation and footnote omitted). After conducting that review, "the Court may `accept, reject, or modify, in whole or in part, the . . . recommendations made by the magistrate judge.'" Id. (quoting 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C)).

The Court has reviewed Magistrate Judge Peebles' August 28, 2014 Report and Recommendation for clear error and manifest injustice; and, finding none, the Court hereby

ORDERS that Magistrate Judge Peebles' August 28, 2014 Report-Recommendation is ACCEPTED in its entirety for the reasons stated therein; and the Court further

ORDERS that Defendants' motion for summary judgment is DENIED without prejudice to renew following the completion of discovery; and the Court further

ORDERS that this matter is referred to Magistrate Judge Peebles for all further pretrial matters; and the Court further

ORDERS that the Clerk of the Court shall serve a copy of this Order on the parties in accordance with the Local Rules.

IT IS SO ORDERED.