Kinetic Fuel Technology, Inc. v. Total Fuel Solutions LLC, 1:16-CV-00020 EAW. (2016)
Court: District Court, W.D. New York
Number: infdco20160426849
Visitors: 11
Filed: Apr. 06, 2016
Latest Update: Apr. 06, 2016
Summary: ORDER ELIZABETH A. WOLFORD , District Judge . This Court referred all pretrial matters in the case to United States Magistrate Judge Jeremiah J. McCarthy pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 636(b)(1)(A) & (B). (Dkt. 9). On March 7, 2016, Magistrate Judge McCarthy issued a thorough Report and Recommendation recommending that Plaintiff's unopposed motion for a preliminary injunction be granted. (Dkt. 30). Pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b)(2) and 28 U.S.C. 636(b)(1), the parties had until March 24, 20
Summary: ORDER ELIZABETH A. WOLFORD , District Judge . This Court referred all pretrial matters in the case to United States Magistrate Judge Jeremiah J. McCarthy pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 636(b)(1)(A) & (B). (Dkt. 9). On March 7, 2016, Magistrate Judge McCarthy issued a thorough Report and Recommendation recommending that Plaintiff's unopposed motion for a preliminary injunction be granted. (Dkt. 30). Pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b)(2) and 28 U.S.C. 636(b)(1), the parties had until March 24, 201..
More
ORDER
ELIZABETH A. WOLFORD, District Judge.
This Court referred all pretrial matters in the case to United States Magistrate Judge Jeremiah J. McCarthy pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §§ 636(b)(1)(A) & (B). (Dkt. 9). On March 7, 2016, Magistrate Judge McCarthy issued a thorough Report and Recommendation recommending that Plaintiff's unopposed motion for a preliminary injunction be granted. (Dkt. 30).
Pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b)(2) and 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1), the parties had until March 24, 2016, to file objections. No objections were filed. The Court is not required to review de novo those portions of a report and recommendation to which objections were not filed. See Mario v. P & C Food Mkts., Inc., 313 F.3d 758, 766 (2d Cir. 2002) ("Where parties receive clear notice of the consequences, failure [to timely] object to a magistrate's report and recommendation operates as a waiver of further judicial review of the magistrate's decision.").
The Court has reviewed the Report and Recommendation, and finds no reason to reject or modify the Report and Recommendation of Magistrate Judge McCarthy. Therefore, the Court accepts and adopts the Report and Recommendation.
SO ORDERED.
Source: Leagle
