Elawyers Elawyers
Ohio| Change

Morris v. King, 9:16-CV-1533 (LEK/TWD). (2017)

Court: District Court, N.D. New York Number: infdco20171121f39 Visitors: 4
Filed: Nov. 20, 2017
Latest Update: Nov. 20, 2017
Summary: ORDER LAWRENCE E. KAHN , District Judge . This matter comes before the Court following a report-recommendation filed on October 13, 2017, by the Honorable Th r se Wiley Dancks, U.S. Magistrate Judge, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 636(b) and Local Rule 72.3. Dkt. No. 24 ("Report-Recommendation"). Within fourteen days after a party has been served with a copy of a magistrate judge's report-recommendation, the party "may serve and file specific, written objections to the proposed findings and reco
More

ORDER

This matter comes before the Court following a report-recommendation filed on October 13, 2017, by the Honorable Thérèse Wiley Dancks, U.S. Magistrate Judge, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b) and Local Rule 72.3. Dkt. No. 24 ("Report-Recommendation").

Within fourteen days after a party has been served with a copy of a magistrate judge's report-recommendation, the party "may serve and file specific, written objections to the proposed findings and recommendations." Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b); L.R. 72.1(c). If no objections are made, or if an objection is general, conclusory, perfunctory, or a mere reiteration of an argument made to the magistrate judge, a district court need review that aspect of a report-recommendation only for clear error. Barnes v. Prack, No. 11-CV-857, 2013 WL 1121353, at *1 (N.D.N.Y. Mar. 18, 2013); see also Machicote v. Ercole, No. 06-CV-13320, 2011 WL 3809920, at *2 (S.D.N.Y. Aug. 25, 2011) ("[E]ven a pro se party's objections to a Report and Recommendation must be specific and clearly aimed at particular findings in the magistrate's proposal, such that no party be allowed a second bite at the apple by simply relitigating a prior argument."). "A [district] judge . . . may accept, reject, or modify, in whole or in part, the findings or recommendations made by the magistrate judge." § 636(b).

No objections were filed in the allotted time period. Docket. Thus, the Court has reviewed the Report-Recommendation for clear error and has found none.

Accordingly, it is hereby:

ORDERED, that the Report-Recommendation (Dkt. No. 24) is APPROVED and

ADOPTED in its entirety; and it is further

ORDERED, that Defendants' motion to dismiss (Dkt. No. 22) is GRANTED and Plaintiff's complaint (Dkt. No. 1) is DISMISSED without prejudice for failure to prosecute; and it is further

ORDERED, that the Clerk of the Court serve a copy of this Order on Plaintiff in accordance with the Local Rules.

IT IS 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