White v. Dishaw, 9:14-cv-2 (GLS/RFT). (2015)
Court: District Court, N.D. New York
Number: infdco20150917i78
Visitors: 7
Filed: Sep. 15, 2015
Latest Update: Sep. 15, 2015
Summary: ORDER GARY L. SHARPE , Chief District Judge . The above-captioned matter comes to this court following a Report-Recommendation by Magistrate Judge Randolph F. Treece, duly filed June 15, 2015. Following fourteen days from the service thereof, the Clerk has sent the file, including any and all objections filed by the parties herein. No objections having been filed 1 , and the court having reviewed the Magistrate Judge's Report-Recommendation for clear error, it is hereby ORDERED that the
Summary: ORDER GARY L. SHARPE , Chief District Judge . The above-captioned matter comes to this court following a Report-Recommendation by Magistrate Judge Randolph F. Treece, duly filed June 15, 2015. Following fourteen days from the service thereof, the Clerk has sent the file, including any and all objections filed by the parties herein. No objections having been filed 1 , and the court having reviewed the Magistrate Judge's Report-Recommendation for clear error, it is hereby ORDERED that the ..
More
ORDER
GARY L. SHARPE, Chief District Judge.
The above-captioned matter comes to this court following a Report-Recommendation by Magistrate Judge Randolph F. Treece, duly filed June 15, 2015. Following fourteen days from the service thereof, the Clerk has sent the file, including any and all objections filed by the parties herein.
No objections having been filed1, and the court having reviewed the Magistrate Judge's Report-Recommendation for clear error, it is hereby
ORDERED that the Report-Recommendation of Magistrate Judge Randolph F. Treece filed June 15, 2015 (Dkt. No. 83) is ACCEPTED in its entirety for the reasons stated therein; and it is further
ORDERED that Defendants' Motion to Dismiss (Dkt. No. 41) is GRANTED in its entirety and that Defendant Lordi is terminated from this action; and it is further
ORDERED that the Clerk provide a copy of this Order to the parties in accordance to the local rules.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
FootNotes
1. On August 4, 2015, the court granted plaintiff's request for an extension of time to file objections to the Report-Recommendation on or before August 31, 2015. Dkt. No. 96. On September 2, 2015, plaintiff filed a letter with the court stating his objections to the report-recommendation will be submitted on or before September 8, 2015. Dkt. No. 101. Despite the passage of the self-imposed deadline, the plaintiff has failed to file any objections to the pending report-recommendation.
Source: Leagle
